Hike.uno
Hike.uno
Login
Login
Username:
Password:
Login
Not registered yet? Registration.
Forgot password?
      

GRS

Print
pohodnik117. 10. 2018 02:43:48
I often read reports about our rescuers' interventions in the mountains. But I'm increasingly wondering why some rescues aren't started to be charged to irresponsible hikers... The last thing that bothered me was the GRS Kranjska Gora report, which went: "At 15.40 on the way to Prisojnik in the municipality of Kranjska Gora, two hikers couldn't continue the path due to snow. Rescuers from GRS Kranjska Gora and the joint HNMP and GRS Brnik team transported the uninjured hikers to the valley with the Slovenian Army helicopter." It's known that snow fell in the mountains and it's also known how to be equipped in such conditions etc etc... Some time ago (a year or two back) I read how the HNMP team was rescuing a dog that got "lost" in the brush (dogs should be on a leash!)... It's sad that some go to the mountains already with that purpose, that a helicopter will take them back to the valley if they can't manage the tour (some apparently called GRS because they didn't have enough water) such adventures at the expense of GRS and us taxpayers are more and more every day and it would be right to charge such interventions! I'm extremely glad we have GRS but I pity the guys because they have to be available every moment due to the stupidity of individuals who think they are hikers! Ultimately, quite a few GRS members have died in mountain interventions...
(+13)like
Kozorog7. 10. 2018 17:27:25
Unfortunately it's like that irresponsible individuals go somewhere they can't reach even in summer, let alone winter or in between. But they always think someone will rescue them if the slope is steeper than they can handle. They forget that with their irresponsible actions and behavior they endanger the lives of rescuers who came to help them. I would bill each one for their rescue!!! It's not GRS that should or could judge the legitimacy of the bill. The fact is that the rescue was performed. If the mountaineer is insured, the insurance will cover the rescue and their mutual relationship is how they will settle it without involving GRS. If the person is not insured, then let them bear the cost of the rescue themselves. Simple, isn't it!
like
bogorski7. 10. 2018 20:00:16
Think a bit more soberly. When you two "fall off the pear tree" - should taxpayers bill you or just leave you … Probably they are mostly in distress and don't call for fun nasmeh
(+5)like
serznoz7. 10. 2018 22:11:33
Falling off the pear tree can't be compared to mountaineering, which involves a certain degree of risk. We don't go abroad without insurance, but at home we think it's not necessary. If we introduced insurance for mountain rescue, we would also set conditions when insurance applies and when not. Inadequate equipment is a reason for denying compensation.
The state should appropriately change regulations, exclude rescue from mandatory health insurance and prescribe special insurance from commercial insurers. They are surely capable and interested in creating various packages that wouldn't deter those who go up rarely. If you're not insured, you pay yourself. If you've already used the insurance, you get a malus. Then we'd see how quickly order would be made. Reducing excessive mountain visits and environmental burden would be a positive side effect of this measure.
(+2)like
bogorski7. 10. 2018 23:15:35
Only solidarity connects us. That's the basis for coexistence.
I don't know why mountain/hill rescue should be excluded from mandatory health insurance. Other risky "hobbies" are also covered by mandatory insurance.
I don't even understand why we would indirectly limit people's recreation …
(+6)like
pohodnik117. 10. 2018 23:30:15
@bogorski... is solidarity for you that someone irresponsibly in sneakers or somehow else; maybe even intentionally heads to the hills with the purpose that they'll be flown back to the valley by helicopter at the end?? What kind of solidarity is that for you???, that GRS members risk their lives for such irresponsible... think a bit!!! is that solidarity or exploitation for you...
(+3)like
drdivx8. 10. 2018 14:31:26
In my opinion, adequacy of equipment according to the season would suffice.
I'm against insurance companies because it would quickly happen that they check the purchase date of your shoes too. The sole on those older than 5 years is no longer so flexiblenasmeh
(+3)like
VanSims8. 10. 2018 14:52:47
Besides exploiting taxpayers by irresponsible individuals, there's another moment here that even introducing commercial insurance can't fully eliminate. That, as someone already said, GRS members risk health and life.

True, with commercial insurance there are immediately fewer such cases, because people are more cautious, since the insurer can refuse the claim. But accidents still happen. Except in obvious cases, it's often hard to assess if the mountaineer was prepared for the tour, not just equipment but also knowledge, experience,... whether the accident was due to negligence or really bad luck, whether the mountaineer was careful or not, what was going on in his head,... Here individual consciousness is still needed. Not out of pity for insurers who profit from accidents anyway, but as said, for the rescuers themselves.

I read a story of one of our mountaineers who climbed a high mountain in the USA, I don't remember where. In the hut below it, the local ranger checked him from head to toe, checked the equipment, verified if he knew how to use it, checked experience,... Then he said: "Yes sir, USA are basically free, everyone can go where they want (except private land), do what they want but so as not to endanger others. I don't let just anyone up the mountain because if something happens to you up there, it would endanger my guys and their lives when they come to rescue you."

And probably regardless of who would pay the costs of the action...
(+1)like
ljubitelj gora8. 10. 2018 17:41:18
I pity the mountain rescuers when they have to rescue in any weather. Maybe the helicopter won't be there then, they have to do everything on foot. They also have night rainy interventions. Not to mention in winter in cold, bad snow conditions, until now they went quickly to fetch everyone and risked their lives for someone who went up to challenge at 3rd degree avalanche risk. The next day they get a daily allowance of I think just over 5 euros and maybe a hot meal in the hut, IF they can, maybe nothing. Really sad how much they risk right after bad conditions. The guys should first take care of their own safety then the rescue action would start.
like
GregorC8. 10. 2018 18:02:47
I'm glad that mountain rescuers aren't so complexed as some commentators here on this forum. The guys and girls know well what they're getting into, what awaits them and why they become rescuers and therefore deserve big applause. After all, they decide voluntarily because of the desire to help others. And NO one will convince me that anyone goes to mountains, hills or anywhere with the thought that if it doesn't work out, the helicopter will come. And judging someone by two lines of report on urszr portal is total idiocy and nonsense, to which various so-called journalists in sensationalist media like 24ur, Slovenske novice etc. contribute a lot.
After all, firefighters don't refuse help to anyone and don't issue bills, and they often go on intervention due to someone's negligence. And surely 90% of interventions are done by members of volunteer fire brigades.

(+14)like
JusAvgustin30. 11. 2022 18:56:04
https://youtu.be/ibsxwLIR4Fo

Support your local GRS societies.
(+3)like
dprapr30. 12. 2022 09:53:04
It's still possible this year to donate part of income tax (1%) to GRS. With digital certificate it's simple.
It costs us nothing, we just redirect part of income tax to those who might provide us help in the hills.
(+4)like
You must log in to post a comment:
Username:
Password:
Login
If you do not yet have a username, you must first register.
         
Copyright © 2026 Hike.uno, Terms of use, Privacy and cookies