I may have posted something like this before, but it has come up again and is worth repeating.
Search and Rescue services and recreational boats
     Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy, (last edited, 7-24)
I have been writing about safety at sea, here and there, for a long time and a few years ago started writing about our “deal” (if you will) as recreational skippers with Search and Rescue (SAR) services as I see it. I believe I was the first to put the following in this way, but the ideas have since found acceptance in a few arenas.
Most portrayals of sailing/boating life are of a sun-drenched, care-free and unfettered lifestyle where no one tells you what to do or how to do it. And, like all such descriptions, there is truth to it. Generally: there are no/few rules and regulations, there are no/few inspections, there are no/few licenses needed. What is rarely addressed in the portrayals of such freedom is that the great freedom comes with great responsibility for the skipper who can and must make decisions with no or little outside oversight or guidance.
And when, in the old days, sailors dropped their mooring, they were perfectly clear they were on their own: for better or for worse. Most prepared themselves and their boat with that thought firmly in mind.
These days, much of the above still exists, but you no longer have to be on your own. There is now the capacity to reach out for help from any position on earth. And expect it. And, because of this, too many, I worry, see the skill and availability of SAR services as a bit of a “get out of jail free” card for when they get into trouble. This “easy” availability of help/rescue diminishes the motivation to have the boat and its crew be well-prepared and may even promote risk taking.
This tendency is exacerbated by the shear numbers of recreational boaters and, I think, by the unrealistic (to my mind) expectation that going to sea is no big deal. And, generally, in the way life often unfolds, it usually is no big deal. But, going to sea is, as Mother Goose says: “When it is good, it is really really good, but when bad, it is horrid.” And a skipper’s responsibility is to have the boat and crew ready for the occasionally-to-be-encountered horrid times. And, with enough miles under the keel, it will be “when” and not “if” the horrid occurs.
As a result, I read of and hear about, on a regular basis, SAR call-outs where, even in the short reports that come my way, it is clear that the skipper and/or the boat had not been properly prepared. Moreover, casual observation and conversations has convinced me that too many boats are going to sea with significant gaps in their preparation.
With the above in mind and with respect to reaching out for SAR help, I would portray our “deal” with Search and Rescue support services as recreational boaters is that we will go to sea in a boat and with skipper/crew well-equipped and well-prepared to meet the bad conditions that the cruising area we choose can occasionally dish out and then, if we run into bad luck, SAR services will be called. That is the deal that “gives us permission” to carry an EPIRB and put out a MAYDAY on vhf. And SAR services, again to my mind, are there for our bad luck and not for poor boat preparation or for bad judgment on the skipper’s part.
That said, I see far too many boats out there who, in my estimation, are not living up to their side of the deal.
By well equipped, I mean first boat choice and then that there is appropriate gear to deal with reasonably expected bad conditions and low-level bad luck that might occur: a skipper does the hard thing in preparation so as to live up to his/her part of the deal. Well prepared also applies to the skipper and crew: they need to have the requisite skill and experience to deal with reasonably occurring difficult conditions in their cruising area and the occasional low-level bad luck that any boat experiences. By challenging conditions, a weather example: coastal cruisers should be able to handle a squall with high gusting winds and an offshore passage-making boat be prepared to weather a sustained gale. Even with good boat preparation and an experienced skipper and crew, trouble can still occur if bad luck gets into the mix: any boat can have significant bad luck. And SAR services, again to my mind, are there for bad luck and not for poor boat preparation or for bad judgment on the skipper’s part. (From actual reported events): bad luck might include hitting a semi-submerged log and disabling the rudder while poor judgement, while more subjective, might include sailing southbound in the Gulf Stream around Cape Hatteras in November in a sailboat with a bad wind forecast).
I care about the skipper and crew, especially those crew who are just passengers out for fun and adventure and may not have a clue about the safety of the vessel. But my major concern is that at some point, a rescue will lead to the death of, or serious injury to, a SAR crew. Every SAR call-out, even under the most benign conditions, holds some danger. This would be tragic in any scenario, but if the rescue was for a vessel calling for aid where it was clear that the boat & crew should not have “been there doing that”: and that they were in trouble not from bad luck, but rather from poor judgment, poor preparation and/or inadequate equipment, the tragedy enters a new realm.
Think of trying to explain to the spouse of an injured/killed SAR person that the injury/death occurred during a rescue of a skipper who was off Cape Hatteras in Nov. and had little or no offshore experience. Or a motor boat who leaves a marina for a 30-mile trip along a rocky lee shore and does not check that he/she has enough fuel and runs out. Rescues can be and often are dangerous undertakings.
Another concern, also potent, is that, in response to unreasonable and/or excessive call-outs (or the worst, a SAR personnel being hurt or killed), there may be a bureaucratic outcry to develop rules and regulations for vessels and crew to meet before departure: this impacts one of the major appeals of a cruising life: independence and freedom from interference. This has already occurred in isolated instances.
Now, I admit where one draws the line is argue-able, but I would contend, the issue is not.