fbpixel
  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 13 posts | 
by OntPhoto on Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:24 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6445
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
I saw this link posted while browsing another photography website. An interesting NewYork Times article on the behaviour and expectations of some visitors to the National Parks. There's also a link to a YouTube video about a couple that got gored by a buffalo. "Watch Donald get gored,” she said as her companion hustled toward a grazing one-ton beast for a closer shot with his own camera." - NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/science/earth/22parks.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=national%20park&st=cse


Last edited by OntPhoto on Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 

by Chris Hominuk on Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:34 pm
Chris Hominuk
Forum Contributor
Posts: 504
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Wow. I'm speechless. Great article.
Chris Hominuk
Mississauga, Ontario
http://www.chrishominukphoto.com
 

by Royce Howland on Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:34 pm
User avatar
Royce Howland
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11704
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Member #:00460
The ignorance (and even outright stupidity) of some people no longer really surprises me -- only that they manage to survive it. But even that is less surprising, as the article describes. Modern technological society with all its safety mechanisms and services manages to bail people out of their folly so often. Sadly, this teaches them that they can be foolish and engage in high-risk activities and get away with it... so they will probably do it again. Even more sadly, SAR personnel (often volunteer based) and emergency services increasingly come under criticism (or lawsuits!) when they are unable to successfully rescue people, as if it's the fault of these personnel that the ones needing rescue couldn't be pulled out of the pit they so often dug for themselves.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the company where I've been working for awhile has been mounting a major safety program the past couple of years. Safety had always been a concern for them, but they're trying to create an intentional safety-oriented working culture, which is no small ambition. The first lesson in the initial, formal part of the program is that safety is a matter of personal accountability, and to set aside the attitude that someone or something will always bail me out if I put myself in jeopardy through taking an at-risk behavior.

The second thing learned in the formal program is that I need to ask myself 3 questions when going into a situation, old or new:
  • Am I aware of the risks that may exist in this situation, and prepared for the occurrence of hazards?
  • Have I become complacent through repetitive experience and not having anything go wrong?
  • Is the illusion that I'm in control or the complacency of repetition leading me to risky behavior to get some kind of thrill or fun?
There are numerous variations to these questions. An increasingly common one is, "Do I believe that technology and a SAR team can rescue me unharmed no matter what happens?" For sure, going through this program has given me a different mindset when I'm in the field doing photo work...
Royce Howland
Visit my web site for photo galleries, my blog and photo tours & workshops
 

by AaronFM on Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:46 pm
User avatar
AaronFM
Forum Contributor
Posts: 168
Joined: 01 Feb 2009
Location: Concord, NH
Very true. Technology has become a crutch for people who get themselves into a jam. Instead of stopping and thinking about what the safe thing to do in the situation may be, or how to self-rescue; they either press on due to ignorance of their situation, or press 911 on the cell-phone for a non emergency.

I've seen people on Mt Washington in NH numerous times who don't have the gear or or appear to have the knowledge to know what to do when the weather goes south. Chatting with them, asking what they would do if the weather dropped 40* and it started to snow, they replied they'd just find their way down or call 911 on their cell phone. These are people in shorts or jeans, 1 or 2 bottles of water for their group, and maybe a light jacket -- hiking a 4 mile 4000' elevation change trail to 'the worst weather in the world'. Other friends recall similar instances at numerous other National/State parks and forests. Scary!

I think that people are so used to being in control of their surroundings that they fail to realize how much at the mercy of mother nature they are while in the backcountry. I'm not sure how to solve the problem. Imposing fines to compensate SAR efforts doesn't seem to make people think twice about going into the backcountry without proper planning/gear/knowledge. Signs at trailheads go unread or unheeded.
 

by Ed Cordes on Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:32 pm
User avatar
Ed Cordes
Forum Contributor
Posts: 3615
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Location: Corning, NY
Member #:00700
I hope the Park Service charges the people for the non warranted "service calls"! I love technology, but despite having HH GPS etc, I still carry and know how to use a compass and do not count on cell phone reception.
Life is beautiful, but remember, a little mild insanity keeps us healthy
 

by goudswaard on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:08 pm
User avatar
goudswaard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 209
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
Location: Abbotsford, BC, Canada
YIM
Charging for SAR is a bad idea, even for nuisance calls. Read this and give it some thought.
Peter Goudswaard
 

by Colin Inman on Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:18 pm
Colin Inman
Regional Moderator
Posts: 8694
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Location: Cumbria, England
Member #:00333
We get our fair share here too http://www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk/ ... Ugg_boots/
Colin
 

by EMartinPhoto on Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:56 am
User avatar
EMartinPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 143
Joined: 10 Aug 2010
Location: South Florida
I am often down in Everglades National Park where there are alligators by the dozens in the visitor areas. I can't count how many times I've seen people trying to pet the alligators or getting really close for photos of them despite the signage and warnings from park rangers.
 

by Paul Skoczylas on Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:20 am
User avatar
Paul Skoczylas
Forum Contributor
Posts: 13790
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Member #:00284
I was going to post some "nice" examples, but then I started second guessing myself. I've done some of the same things as the "tourons", although I tend to do them in out-of-the way places where I'm not making a spectacle of myself...

I blogged on this topic at My Blog.

-paul
 

by Ed Cordes on Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:33 pm
User avatar
Ed Cordes
Forum Contributor
Posts: 3615
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Location: Corning, NY
Member #:00700
Paul, I just read your blog and generally agree with you. The difference in my mind is that most of those climbing fences in tourist places don't understand the risks involved and most likely are not prepared for anything out of the ordinary. They most likely have little to zero real wilderness experience to assist them in the event of an unforseen issue. Therefore thier risk is even higher.
Life is beautiful, but remember, a little mild insanity keeps us healthy
 

by Russ on Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:38 pm
User avatar
Russ
Forum Contributor
Posts: 321
Joined: 06 Aug 2009
Location: Tacoma, WA area
Paul, I read your blog and have to say I largely agree with the accepted risks of going it alone in the wilderness. At 65 it gets even dicier....but I'm not staying at home to avoid possibilities. I'd do it with others, but I like my own pace and, frankly, the solitude usually. I also marvel at the clueless "fish out of water" doings of tourists, often thinking there should be a required orientation test before one get enter a NP...but that's way too onerous.....and I wouldn't want to submit to its counterpart if I visited NYC sometime!!!

The one issue I'd take is your off trail tendency....not that I'm lily white! As often as not, its not about your security but rather about impact on the terrain (ie erosion, fragile plants, etc). I don't off trail in high traffic areas or fragile high alpine areas. If I'm off trail (permissible in certain areas), I'm careful as to where I put my feet and/or any equipment I have. Like you, I avoid doing it in the presence of others who might construe it as precedent setting for doing likewise any/everywhere. If a trail or worn pathway is clearly flagged/fenced or filled with piled dead branches I avoid "end running" the intent to rehabilitate the area.
 

by Paul Skoczylas on Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:37 pm
User avatar
Paul Skoczylas
Forum Contributor
Posts: 13790
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Member #:00284
Russ,

I'm certainly with you on off-trail activities in sensitive areas! The two examples I gave in that blog post were not in sensitive areas. Up in the alpine, I'm very careful to stay on the trails, and I never shortcut switchbacks.

Probably shooting macro in the wilderness is the most problematic that way--your equipment is right down on the ground, and you're lying down to get close to it. When I'm shooting flowers in the alpine, I'm only shooting the ones by the trail, so I don't have to leave the trail.

Another shot from the same weekend (one of my most productive ever):
Image


I didn't get anyone out on the ice, since this was late in the day. But you can see how few people respect the "safe" zone set out by Parks Canada. The sign you see (and several more on the walk from the parking lot) describe the dangers of going outside the safe zone, and give details on some people (including young children) who died a slow death trapped in crevasses not far up the ice. And yet people still persist--after all, such things can't happen to them. It's not illegal to go off-trail in most places in the parks--even where there are fences--just not recommended. This is the easiest access point to the Columbia Icefields (the alternative is usually the Saskatchewan Glacier, but that's a 4-6 km walk from the car to the ice), and experienced mountaineers will sometimes start from this point. It's also a good starting point for glacier training courses because of its accessibility. For this reason, it's not illegal to go beyond the pylons. And people do it, as you can see. And every once in a while, someone dies. It's different when it's a tourist as opposed to a mountaineer (or kayaker if you're at one of the whitewater spots) who is knowingly taking the risk, with some level of experience and equipment. But the rules have to account for both. And most people aren't in favour of some kind of permit system, so what do you do?

-Paul
 

by Moodyvillain on Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:24 am
User avatar
Moodyvillain
Forum Contributor
Posts: 367
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Location: Port Moody B.C. Canada
Calling the search and rescue to top up your water should be treated the same way as prank calling the police, fire or ambulance. There should be a fine or be charged the full amount of the cost of rescue. (the $3000+ it takes for a helicopter) Make people pay for being so stupid.
Criticism is always welcome.

My Imagekind Gallery
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
13 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group