Five Auckland trampers rescued from Te Araroa Trai
This is really [stretching the definition of rescue](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12050656): > Metcalfe said the group started out at 7am, but at 6pm they had not reached the end and were wet, cold, tired and only had one torch so called 111. If we were to charge people for irresponsibility, this would be the case wouldn't it?
authorities don't call them out for incorrect use of a beacon. its happening more and more.
Goddamn that annoys me.
Better,and cheaper,to have a rescue than a search & rescue.We've all made some dumb decisions;now it's someone elses turn. They say in yachting circles,"if you haven't been aground,you haven't been around".
"He said they made the right call to stop and call for help, rather than carry on in the dark and go off down the wrong track or sustain an injury." Always worth obtaining the full story before judging - if the SAR spokesperson considers it the "right call", I'd want (a lot) more information than one report before disagreeing.
I certainly agree this was the right call. What I'm objecting against is people not even taking the minimum care, basically deliberately putting themselves in a situation that plan B is 111. In certain states in the US you will get billed for your rescue in such a case. Not here, not sure that's needed, but there's vast difference between an accident and an accident waiting to happen.
needing to be provided with dry clothing from SAR is an indication they may not have been experienced enough or prepared for the conditions, they should have had shelter with them to spend the might out in the weather that was forecast.
lewshaw, the tramper version is: "if you haven't gotten lost in the woods, you haven't been very far into them" :-)
3 quotes from the article "They opted for another walk through the Raetea Forest, which Department of Conservation information said would take 10 hours." "They were unfamiliar with the area and got caught out by the length of time to walk the track." He said at this time of year the track is very muddy, and trees had blown across the track, so it could "easily" take 12 to 13 hours to complete. Metcalfe said the group were fit and had a distress beacon and cellphones. However, they only had day packs, and needed to "carry a bit more gear". "He said searchers were able to use a phone belonging to one of the members of the group to determine the group's location. They were around 4km from the end of the track." In other words Doc told them an unrealistic time considering the time of year and they had no way of knowing how close they got. Another 1 or 2 hours and there would of been no news story. However it doesnt forgive them for inadequate gear.
Even 10 hours is marginal with the short days, very little little room for anything going not exactly to plan
Search the forums
Formatting your posts
The forums support MarkDown syntax. Following is a quick reference.
|Type this...||To get this...|
|Italic||*Italic text*||*Italic text*|
|Bold||**Bold text**||**Bold text**|
|Quoted text||> Quoted text||> Quoted text|
|Emojis||:smile: :+1: :astonished: :heart:||:smile: :+1:
- item 1
- item 2
- item 3
|- item 1 - item 2 - item 3|