Good, this issue is worthy of a separate thread, not distracting the Survivor man thread.

The troubles with your statement are several:

- Exactly how do you draw the line between those worthy of rescue and those who are not? I guess base jumping qualifies as "daredevil" stunt. What about venturing into the woods with inadequate gear? The recent so-called survivor man comes to mind, but A LOT of day hikers come in this category too.

- Who should make that decision? Believe me, rescue HQ wont have anything to do with that decision: They'll rescue anyone within their capabilities, no matter how stupid.

- What is the consequences of not being found worthy of rescue? Do you just leave 'em to die or do you haul them in and seek reimbursements?

Not saving someone you're capable of saving is obviously unacceptable. Seeking reimbursements has a lot of problems, one of them being that it raises the threshold of contacting authorities when you have trouble. I am very much against it.