moutntain.jpg
View of Mount Baring where a BASE jumper was rescued Tuesday morning. (KIRO Radio/Chris Sullivan)

Footing the bill for the BASE jumper rescue

By CHRIS SULLIVAN
KIRO Radio

"When my string breaks, I'm dead," a tired, cold and sore Eldon Burrier screamed to a 911 dispatcher as he hung from a rock outcropping on Mount Baring in Snohomish County. The BASE jumper's parachute got caught about 200 feet into his jump from the top of the mountain. About 60 volunteers risked their lives to save the 45-year-old Lynnwood man.

The rescue has people asking again who should pay for rescues when the people who get in trouble put themselves at risk on purpose.

There is no controversy if authorities launch helicopters or send out a search party for a family that gets lost on a trail or a child that becomes separated from group the climbers. When a skier intentionally goes off the trail into the back-country and gets in trouble or a guy jumps off a mountain and gets stuck, taxpayers might find themselves asking who should be responsible for footing the bill for the rescue.

"We do not charge people," Snohomish County Search and Rescue Deputy Peter Teske said.

Teske says he doesn't want to discourage those who are lost from calling for help.

"People who get lost and need aid will not call 911 thinking about the financial issue and then become more lost or more injured."

Some groups are pushing for extreme sports enthusiasts to buy rescue insurance before they head out.

Barrier was not injured in his mishap on Mt. Baring, but he was arrested once he got off the mountain. He had an outstanding warrant for reckless endangerment for jumping off the Deception Pass Bridge on the first day of halibut season.

Top Stories

  • More to the Story
    Liberace's ex-lover says the world will hear more of his story, and Michael Jackson's in there

  • 'I Am A God'
    Critics say Kanye West's album will change music forever

  • A Skeptic's Doubts
    An ESPN columnist doubts Russell Wilson will ever be elite
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (9)


  • Add A Comment

  • The way I see it! wrote...
    Can you say
    Us!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • StuckinWA wrote...
    60 people???
    I paid $30 to even think about going above Muir on Rainier. That helps offset some of the costs of that rescue and the Army spends money to practice whether there is a real situation or not: But 60 people to rescue 1 guy hanging on a cliff? Reminds me of seeing 5 cop cars closing 3 lanes of traffic for 2 hours to measure skid marks. Lets use some common sense and think about spending money like it is your own. 60 people is a colossal waste. The guy was hanging on a cliff close to where he told them he took off, on his cell phone, not like he was completely lost in the deep dark forest.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Kevin DeFields wrote...
    Why does no one ask who should pay...
    for emergency services are called out for any other reason? The Seattle Fire Dept alone responded to over 77,000 calls last year. Who's going to pay for that? You're the one who had the medical emergency. You're the one who crashed your car. It's your house that burned down. Why should we have to pay for it? Get out your checkbook and pay for it yourself.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • The way I see it! wrote...
    StuckinWA
    Actually that has been the "norm" for decades. When I was in the military (21years) an event would happen and we would send everybody we had. I asked an old salty commander, Sir! why do we do that? He said, Son! the bean counters add that crap up at the end of the year to justify requesting more money for next year! I said, roger that!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SnowboardinWA wrote...
    Who should pay?
    Who should pay if it was someone skiing? Who should pay if it was someone fishing? Who should pay if it was someone hiking?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • The way I see it! wrote...
    Re: SnowboardinWA
    Probably that "someone" involved.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • make_or_break wrote...
    @Kevin DeFields
    That's why they're called TAXES. What...you think we hire firefighters and cops just to say that we have them? As for the rest of you whiners: was it illegal to do what this guy was doing? No? Then it's OUR (the public) nickel to pay for rescuing this idiot. Don't like it? Then change the rules by which thrillseekers like this imbecile play by.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Kevin DeFields wrote...
    @make_or_break
    Thank you. That's my point.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HRT1 wrote...
    Why 60 people.
    The facts. 50 of those people were volunteer mountain rescue members, not paid. It takes at least 12 to 15 to run a manual technical rope system. Is take a volunteer staff of 5 to 10 to man the Command Post the deal with Communications. It was a two operational shift mission. 300 pounds of rescue equipment has to be carried up 4000 vertical feet to the rescue site. The air crew is 5 more, half of them are volunteers. We leave jobs and family to provide this service to the community. We don't do that lightly. It was the right amount of personnel for the task.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }