The new regulations for outdoor rescue recovery in Dapeng New District, Shenzhen will be implemented in October. Who will bear the cost of violating mountain climbing regulations? Lawyer's interpretation

Introduction: The era of "free rescue" for outdoor exploration is coming to an end

On October 12, 2026, the "Management Measures for Outdoor Mountaineering Risk Rescue and Recovery in Dapeng New District, Shenzhen (Trial)" will be officially implemented. This means that in the future, if anyone enters undeveloped or unopened areas for activities such as hiking, mountaineering, rock climbing, camping, or river tracing within the Dapeng New Area and encounters danger, the relevant parties have the right to recover labor costs, accommodation costs, transportation costs, equipment costs, material costs, medical expenses for rescue personnel, and other necessary expenses from the event organizers and the rescued personnel after the rescue is completed.

Dapeng New Area has abundant mountain resources. Since 2025, 304 mountain rescue incidents have been handled, 4954 rescue personnel have been dispatched, and 600 people have been safely rescued, most of whom are related to illegal exploration. The dilemma of 'reckless risk-taking, public payment' has finally been systematically resolved. As Shenzhen lawyers who have been dealing with personal injury and contract disputes for a long time, our focus is not only on whether to pursue recovery, but also on the legal basis, responsibility allocation, and compliance response behind the recovery.

1、 The legal nature of the new recovery regulations: administrative normative documents rather than "fines"

Firstly, it is necessary to clarify a common misconception: the recovery of rescue costs is not an administrative penalty, but rather an administrative confirmation and enforcement mechanism for civil "no cause management" or "compensation for infringement damages".

Article 979 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the administrator has no legal or contractual obligation to manage the affairs of others in order to avoid losses to their interests, they may request the beneficiary to repay the necessary expenses incurred in managing the affairs. The public rescue organized by the government is essentially using public finance to pay for the risky behavior of specific beneficiaries. When the beneficiary has obvious faults - unauthorized entry into unopened areas, ignoring safety warnings - the government, as the administrator, has the right to pursue compensation.

The 'Measures' of Dapeng New Area belong to administrative normative documents. It does not create new types of penalties, but clarifies and implements the above-mentioned civil claims through administrative procedures. This means that if the person being recovered is dissatisfied with the recovery decision, the relief path is not administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation, but a civil dispute resolution channel. Many outdoor clubs and team leaders have not yet realized this.

2、 Who will be pursued? Responsibility allocation between organizers and participants

The Measures specify that the objects of recovery include "organizers of outdoor mountaineering activities and rescued personnel". In legal practice, the nature and proportion of responsibility of these two types of subjects are completely different.

For organizers, especially commercial outdoor clubs, team leaders, and WeChat group owners, they may face heavier recovery responsibilities. Article 1165 of the Civil Code stipulates that if a person infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to fault and causes damage, they shall bear tort liability. If the organizer knows that the route is not open but still leads the team to enter, or fails to fulfill their obligations such as safety notification, equipment inspection, emergency plan, etc., their degree of fault is relatively high, and they may bear the main or even all rescue costs. We have represented similar cases before: a club leader led 28 people across an unopened coastline, and one person fell off a cliff, with rescue costs exceeding 120000 yuan. The court ultimately ordered the club to bear 70%, the leader to bear 20%, and the participants to bear 10%.

For ordinary participants, recovery is based on the premise of "unauthorized entry". If the participant is following the organizer and the organizer has not informed them of the risks, they may claim a reduction in responsibility. But if you enter on your own, knowing the warning, it is inevitable that you will be held responsible.

Special reminder: Minors who participate in such activities may encounter danger, and their guardians may be pursued for failing to fulfill their guardianship responsibilities. Article 1188 of the Civil Code stipulates that if a person without or with limited capacity for civil conduct causes harm to others, the guardian shall bear tort liability. Although rescue costs do not "cause harm to others", there are precedents in judicial practice that support seeking compensation from guardians.

3、 Scope and Calculation of Recovery: Which Costs Can be Recovered and Which Cannot

The Measures specify labor fees, accommodation fees, transportation fees, equipment fees, material fees, medical expenses for rescue personnel, and other necessary expenses. From a lawyer's perspective, the recovery of these expenses must meet three conditions: actual occurrence, reasonable necessity, and direct relevance to the rescue.

In practice, the "labor cost" and "equipment cost" are prone to disputes. If the rescue personnel are government full-time personnel and their salaries have already been paid by the government, can they be included in the labor fee again? We believe that only additional expenses such as overtime pay and temporary staff costs should be calculated. The equipment cost is limited to the actual consumption or damage during the rescue process, rather than equipment depreciation.

In addition, if the person in distress is already injured, the cost of rescue and compensation for personal injury are two different things. The recovery of rescue costs does not affect the distressed party's claim for personal injury compensation from other parties at fault, and vice versa. But if the person in distress is at fault, the compensation amount will be deducted accordingly.

It is worth noting that if the event organizer purchases outdoor insurance, will the insurance company bear the cost of recovery? It depends on the insurance terms. Most outdoor accident insurance only covers personal injury and does not cover recovery of rescue costs. Organizers should consider purchasing "outdoor liability insurance" or "leader liability insurance" to transfer the risk of recovery.

4、 Compliance recommendations for outdoor enthusiasts and clubs

Firstly, verify the legality of the route before departure. The Dapeng New Area has clearly designated undeveloped and unopened areas. The organizers should proactively inquire with the local emergency management department or community and keep records of the inquiry.

Secondly, sign a written risk notification. The notice should specify the route risks, exit mechanism, and cost recovery terms, and be signed by the participants. Although it cannot completely exempt the organizer from responsibility, it can prove that the obligation of disclosure has been fulfilled and reduce the proportion of fault.

Thirdly, purchase sufficient liability insurance. Commercial clubs should include "recovery of rescue costs" in their insurance coverage, with a recommended coverage amount of no less than 500000 yuan.

Fourthly, cooperate with rescue efforts and preserve evidence in case of distress. Including rescue instructions, cost list, and communication records. If there is any objection to the amount of recovery, promptly raise a written objection and seek legal intervention.

Fifth, ordinary tourists should respect nature and follow warnings. Once in danger, in addition to personal risk, there may also be tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of yuan in recovery bills.

Conclusion: Public resources should not be consumed arbitrarily, and the law sets a red line for outdoor exploration

This move by Dapeng New Area is not the first of its kind in the country, but systematizing and standardizing it has demonstrative significance. From a lawyer's perspective, recovery is not the goal, but rather a rational approach guided by economic leverage. For individuals, a violation of exploration rules may result in a court summons; For a club, a lucky lead may result in a loss of annual profits.

Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has a long-term focus on outdoor sports, personal injury, and administrative compliance. It can provide risk assessment, contract review, insurance configuration, and dispute resolution services for outdoor clubs and event organizers. If you or your team frequently organize outdoor activities, it is recommended to undergo a compliance medical examination as soon as possible - don't wait for the rescue cost recovery form to arrive before remembering the legal "safety rope".