The question raised by France’s Court of Auditors before the Senate’s Finance Committee is politically explosive, yet it has become increasingly difficult to avoid. In France, the use of public helicopters for mountain rescue amounted to around €45 million in 2024, against a backdrop of rising numbers of call-outs.

The Court of Auditors estimates that 9,912 mountain rescue missions were carried out that year, at an average cost of roughly €10,780 per intervention. In other words, the debate now under way concerns a public service that is being called upon more and more, that is becoming more expensive as aircraft operating costs rise, and that rests on an almost entirely free-at-the-point-of-use principle.

That said, looking at practices elsewhere immediately shows there is no miracle model—whether fully free or fully paid. Spain, for instance, has historically remained attached to the principle of free mountain rescue. Such operations are regarded as a core sovereign mission, but several autonomous communities have introduced billing in cases of negligence. Yet in practice, these mechanisms are rarely applied. Catalonia, a pioneer in this approach, has billed for only fourteen rescues since 2009, according to the Court of Auditors’ summary. That speaks volumes. Charging, in theory, is very simple. Legally defining recklessness—without discouraging people from calling for help—is far more delicate when human lives are at stake, beyond the financial dimension.

At the other end of the spectrum, Switzerland embraces a much more “personal responsibility” approach. In the Swiss system, rescue costs are generally billed to the victims, with insurance mechanisms designed to soften the blow. Rega, the Swiss Air-Rescue service, also states that after a mission, it is in principle the rescued person—or their insurer—who pays. It adds that an airlifted mission costs on average around 4,500 Swiss francs (€4,900), and more for complex operations. This model works, but it relies on a long-standing insurance culture and on a hybrid public/private funding structure.

Austria takes the “rescue first, bill later” logic even further. Its system places financial responsibility on the rescued person through a two-part billing process: one invoice for ground rescue and another for helicopter operators. Some aerial interventions can reach €6,000 to €9,000, while reimbursement by the social security system remains capped. It is no coincidence that, in this country, insurance products have become almost a standard add-on to alpine activities. The Bergrettung (the Austrian Mountain Rescue Service) thus offers worldwide coverage. For its part, the Alpenverein—a major alpine club—includes, for its members, coverage of rescue costs up to €25,000.

Germany, in Bavaria, has chosen an intermediate route that likely deserves France’s attention. Medical emergencies fall under mandatory health insurance, but interventions that are not related to a health emergency are priced. Depending on complexity, the cost is €245, €490 or €980. It is important to note that helicopter costs can rise very quickly—around €90 per minute. Here again, the system has generated a market for specific insurance products. The German Alpine Club also offers dedicated coverage for its members. Italy, too, has opted for a hybrid model: free rescue in proven medical emergencies, but financial participation for rescues not medically justified. And there as well, there are very large regional variations, from €25 to €140 per minute for helicopter operations, depending on the area.

The real lesson behind this question is that no major mountain country has ultimately found the perfect formula. Paid systems make practitioners more accountable, sometimes at the risk of delaying calls for help. The most free-at-the-point-of-use systems preserve access to this type of rescue, but struggle to absorb the boom in outdoor activities. France is no longer exempt from this tension.

Jean-François Bourgain, 28/02/2026, for AeroMorning