You are here

Billing For Search and Rescue Missions -- Yes, or No?


SAR personnel practice a mission in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. NASAR photo.

Should search-and-rescue (SAR) subjects be billed for the cost of their rescue? It's long been a thorny issue, one that organizations that respond to SARs long have opposed.

The topic has been broached here on the Traveler in the past, but in light of our recent article on staying safe in the parks, and that of the rescue of a couple in Dinosaur National Monument, it seems fitting to revisit it, particularly in light of a news release from the National Association for Search and Rescue.

The release, issued last week by NASAR, the Mountain Rescue Association, the Colorado Search and Rescue Board, the International Association of Dive Rescue Specialists, the United States Coast Guard and the National Park Service, reiterated those groups' stance that they all either oppose billing, or do not bill, people after a search-and-rescue operation.

“Although it remains a local decision, billing for search and rescue operations is a dangerous practice that should be avoided,” said NASAR President Dan Hourihan.

NASAR's position:

To eliminate the fear of being unable to pay for having one’s life saved, SAR services should be rendered to persons in danger or distress without subsequent cost-recovery from the person(s) assisted unless prior arrangements have been made. The mission of SAR organizations is to save lives, not just the lives of those who can afford to pay the bill. As such, methods and means should be developed and used that diffuse the cost of humanitarian SAR operations among the many, allowing ­anyone to reasonably expect emergency aid without regard to their circumstances.

According to the release, "the idea of not billing for SAR services confuses many people. However, SAR professionals across the nation know of many instances in which someone – after an unforeseen accident, or spending hours searching for their missing companion – delayed calling for help. Each 'remembered' hearing, seeing or reading, 'somewhere' that rescues and searches cost 'thousands of dollars' – which they could not afford. Some have even chosen not to call for help, or refused emergency help."

To underscore this fear, the organizations cited a 2006 case in which a young hiker became stranded on Colorado’s 14,270-foot Quandary Peak. "She called 9-1-1, but asked the SAR team leader just to 'talk her out of the area,'" noted the organizations.

"The sun had already set and cold weather surrounded her in a dangerous area of the mountain. She repeatedly said the SAR team should not come to help her. After going back and forth with her on her cell phone, the SAR team leader finally asked why she didn't want help. She replied, 'I can't afford it.' He explained that there would be no charge and she then relented," noted the groups.

Additional examples where people initially refused help can be found in the attachments below.

“A delay can place SAR personnel in danger and can unnecessarily compound and lengthen a SAR mission,” says Mr. Hourihan. “Not calling for emergency SAR help could be as catastrophic as not calling the fire department when a small stove-top fire jumps to the ceiling and instantly fills the kitchen with flames, because the home owner’s first thought was, ‘How in the world will I pay the fire department?’”

Then-U.S.C.G. Commandant James Loy perhaps explained it best, in 1999, in the Coast Guard’s very similar position. “If the specter of financial reimbursement hung over the decision to report maritime distress, we could get fewer calls, we would get calls during later stages of emergencies, and more people would die at sea. This factor alone outweighs any consideration of how much money we might recoup,” said Admiral Loy.

Traveler footnote: Founded in 1973, the National Association for Search and Rescue comprises more than 10,000 volunteer and paid search and rescue professionals who work at the local, state and national level in land, aviation and water SAR. NASAR conducts hundreds of training courses and thousands of certification exams each year. More than 11,000 people hold any of 11 NASAR certifications in SAR operations.


If the idiots get lost or hurt without carrying the Satellite location beacon available (low costs) they should be charged for any and all rescue costs.

And if they failed to file a flight pan, trip journey they should also be fined for bring idiots.

Search and rescue is for accidents, not the unprepared!!!!


"...adventure without regard to prudence, profit, self-improvement,
learning or any other serious thing" -Aldo Leopold-

Who decides where the line between idiocy and accident is? An interesting subject. I'd really like to see some means of "punishing" people who go off unprepared, willfully ignorant of hazards, expecting rescue when things turn sour. But how do you do that without inhibiting victims of true accidents or freak events from calling in the cavalry?

Perhaps you bill people, but have a system of insurance for SAR costs. When you purchase a back country permit you tack on a couple bucks a day for insurance. If you don't purchase insurance, tough luck. But can a ranger refuse to issue the insurance if the person seems reckless?

Not sure where I stand on this.

-Kirby.....Lansing, MI

If you call 911 and you are taken to the hospital in an ambulance, you WILL receive a bill from the ambulance company.

I don't think that the rescued people should be billed by any SAR group. What happens if one of the members of a SAR group are dumb enough to get lost and have to be rescued? And let's say they were opposed to billing, and they are billed? It's just stupid IMO, and it shows that more and more people are becoming cynical and want payment for something that is mostly voluntary.

If you can't afford a rescue, but are sure the taxpayers can, stay home.

NO,NO,NO Listen to the professionals, the people who volunteer for this duty day and night. If they say no, then its a bad idea. Currently local law enforcement can use judgement if they want to charge someone. So if someone dose something that is judged to be dum, or reckless, or whatever there is currently a means to get money from that person. Many states do have SAR funds to pay for rescue operations and as always and forever Mountain Rescue Association teams do not charge for rescue.

I have mixed feelings about this. Just yesterday I was enjoying my day off hiking in my park when I came across a man collapsed on the side of the trail. I identified myself as a ranger and asked if they needed help. They said he had simply gotten light headed. No one in the party had water and it was 83, in the desert, on a trail rated moderate. They refused any help but I advised them to go back down and get some water before doing the trail. They ignored me and hiked as fast as they could up the trail. I tried to keep up to keep my eye on the man but they out paced me. I later found out that the same man had later become a SAR and had to be carried out. What do you do when a ranger advised them that they weren't prepared but they ignored the warnings?

Add comment


This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

National Parks Traveler's Essential Park Guide

Recent Forum Comments