Paying for ice rescues

[Walizz 1]

Due to treacherous ice conditions this year on Lake Winnebago we have had ice rescues that resulted in a lot of damaged rescue equipment. This has resulted in the equipment being out of service for extended periods of time. Local authorities want to start charging people for rescues if they determine that the people in need of rescue took unnecessary chances by going out there in the first place. This would be at the discretion of the local jurisdictions. This isn't storm related stuff, it's about going out on thin ice when you don't belong there. How do they handle this where you live? How about during the open water season?

[Marble Eyes]

I don't know about Ice Rescues but In our county even with a tax supported EMS system. They still charge you for a run. And our local Township is wanting to charge for fire calls, again even with being run on taxes.

[Muskeez]

If they saved my a$$ i'd have the checkbook open in a hurry, taxes should be used if it's something like a fire or EMS call that could happen to any taxpayer. This is a case of a fishermen taking unnecessary chances, if they take the risk they should be willing to pay to be saved.

Yup. If somebody is stupid enough to put themselves in danger, get into trouble and need help, and thereby endanger EMT and other rescuers, I figure THEY can pay for being saved instead of taking it out of my taxes.

The trouble is, how does one determine what should have been obviously dangerous and what was just misfortune. I am not sure that can be defined. I would hate to leave that decision to the head of the emergency services or to the commissioner or mayor or to attorneys.

[cbohn]

the other problem is that the people who brought all of this on were not even fisherman but some dumb a$$es who thought it would be a good idea to try an experimental hoovercraft out on thin ice. they then put their ugly mugs on the tube and somewhat bragged about it. i feel that it should not be something you get charged for because you do pay your taxpayer money for services like that. does the drunk who hits a family of five get charged for the services since it was his own negligence who endangered everyone on the road. i know he will get a fine and everything else they would deserve but the point is that there are many instances of people putting themselves in harms way on land and they do not get charged for rescue efforts. just my 2 cents.

If its going to be charged then it should not be run by any government agencies.

Whats next? Do you want to get charged when you call the Police out because you think some one was trying to break into your house???

[Marken]

Fond du Lac County will now charge $500.00 per call plus $34.50 per hour per officer involved with any ice rescue. They estimate five officers will be involved per rescue.

Not a problem with me unless they don't charge the same for rescues the rest of the year. The charges they say will help off-set the cost of their "new" $30,000.00 hovercraft and operating costs involved.

Think about it. Once any agency gets there foot in the door, where will it end?? Did the boat people from Vietnam, or Cuba get charged? It cost a heck of a lot more to rescue them than it does a few icefisherman each year. In my opinion, we should NOT be charged. We pay enough taxes to cover stuff like that now. How could anyone really draw a line on what is safe and not safe ice?? I know what your going to say. I can't imagine anyone doing it on purpose, I would hate to have to be rescued. Scare the heck out of me. Probably quit ice fishing especially if I had to leave stuff behind and it sinks. Hate thinking about it.

Charging for rescues is wrong. There are always those that need rescuing. If a person knows that by phoning for help he will be charged for it he may hesitate and cause a serious injury or death. There is not a man on this board who is perfect. Any one of us may need to be rescued one day. It should be part of our tax dollars.

[Walleye Express]

Walizz1.
If I'm not mistaken the Coast Guard either does now, or reserves the right to chage for rescues. I would argue that when and if the Coast Guard publically stated to stay off the ice because of unsafe conditions, and somebody ignored this warning, they would indeed be at fault and deserve being charged for rescue.

But its the Coast Guards Professional standing position that no ice, no matter how thick is safe ice. Now in true essence, I'd have to agree with that as well. Lets face it, it is frozen water being held up by unfrozen water. And I've crossed enough cracks in the ice in my life, to know even really thick ice can get ya.

I guess I'm agains't being charged if the conditions are/were reasonably safe when the incident occured. But would fallow whatever procedure, including coughing up some payola, to get me off the floating frozen Canadian express.