Those who follow along with stories of rescue in the wilderness likely see the same disturbing case play out time after time – the public shaming those that end up needing to call for help. Scroll through the online comments on nearly any story recounting the heroic acts of a search and rescue team and you’ll likely find a number of ‘armchair quarterbacks,’ eager to provide brash criticism from behind their keyboard. Statements are often quick to put blame on those rescued, pointing out what a subject did wrong as if intentional mistakes we made, or at the least, that inexcusable negligence took place.

And it’s true, many times when a search and rescue mission is launched, there are things that the rescue subject could have done differently – better preparation, a closer look at the forecast, a proper assessment of their own abilities, the list goes on. But in response, there’s honest analysis that can be used to help make the outdoor recreation community a safer place and then there’s blatant criticism, with a very real reason to avoid the latter.

In short, widespread public criticism of those who call for help may make people less likely to call for help when help is needed out of fear of being chastised by their peers. Avoiding the call for help, or even just a hesitation, can quickly make a bad situation even worse.

Search and rescuer Michael Coyle described this dilemma with a reference to a case in which a lost snowshoer opted to call her boyfriend instead of emergency services when she found herself in dire straits. Her boyfriend ended up relaying her message to rescue teams, but by the time she was found, it was too late and she had succumbed to the elements. Perhaps a direct call could have resulted in more information being relayed to search and rescue crews, perhaps a direct call could have expedited the mission and saved the woman’s life.

While the reason that the lost snowshoer opted to call her boyfriend instead of emergency services is unknown, Coyle speculated that ‘fear of consequences‘ could have been a contributing factor. Coyle elaborated to say that public criticism can be a consequence that makes people hesitant to make a potentially life-saving call when a trip into nature goes awry. Because of this, it’s crucial that the outdoor recreation community is aware of the resonating impacts comments and criticism can have.

There’s no doubt that there’s a place for coverage of accidents that take place in the outdoor recreation space. This coverage can provide learning opportunities for others, hopefully preventing the same situation from happening again and again, putting both fewer recreators and rescuers at risk. But it is crucial to be mindful of how these situations are approached in terms of the public response.

No one sets out on an adventure expecting it to go wrong, but nearly every long-term outdoor recreation enthusiast has been in a situation where disaster could have been a few wrong moves away. Maybe a water bottle leaks, soaking carefully packed warm layers. Maybe a headlamp or vehicle battery dies. Maybe a backpack breaks or a deceiving foothold gives out. Many times, an accident or sticky situation is a combination of a number of factors, some that can be much more difficult to control and others that can seem to boil down to dumb luck.

Instead of being quick to criticize, seek to offer real advice and support. Use kind words to make the outdoor recreation space more comfortable for beginners (and all members), creating a welcoming community of education, not a place where shaming is a commonly feared consequence. The more approachable meaningful conversation is, the more beneficial it can be, ultimately making the outdoor recreation space safer for everyone involved as a result.

As Coyle wrote as he addressed the aforementioned case of the snowshoer, “public shaming is not just toxic but harmful to good SAR outcomes. We have to avoid creating reluctance to calling for help when needed.”

–––

Here are a few examples of victim shaming that commenters have left related to our coverage of accidents in the past:

“I think a large percentage of people who are kayakers need lessons.”

“Should charge the idiot the cost of responding to his SOS call.”

“They knowingly put themselves and those kids in danger.”

While many search and rescue cases are at least partially due to a mistake by the person that ultimately needs rescue, try to be constructive in response. Angry commenting and victim blaming doesn’t tend to be beneficial to the overall conversation.

If you’re interested in supporting Colorado’s volunteer-powered search and rescue operation, one way to do so is through the purchase of a CORSAR card. It’s cheap, at only $3 per year.

STAY INFORMED: Sign-up for the daily OutThere Colorado newsletter here