I was reading an article yesterday about the proliferation of cheap portable satellite beacons, and the nickname Search and Rescue teams have for them – Yuppie 911.
As a most-often-solo hiker and backpacker, I always carry a satellite beacon with me – but in my years of hiking, I have never once used it for anything other than to send simple “I’m OK” messages to my friends and family, and I would never use it unless I found myself in some serious trouble – lying in a ditch with broken bones or some other nasty trail accident. But apparently, I am in the minority.
While they don’t keep statistics on it yet, the head of the California Search and Rescue team has noticed a dramatic increase in beacon-signaled rescues since the cost of the devices dropped into the affordable-range. Many of the rescue requests end up being accidental activations – from the beacons hitting something in the backpack, for instance – but there are also a lot of examples of people abusing the beacons – like a father and son team who used their beacon three days in a row in the Grand Canyon, or hikers who just get cold or tired on the trail and want a lift out.
I’m sure most of the time, the wolf-cryers foot the bill for the rescues, but the article suggests the problem is two-fold – one, that all the non-essential service requests tie up the rescue teams from actual rescues, and two, that the sense of security that comes with a satellite beacon encourages hikers to go far beyond their skill level and take risks on the trail they wouldn’t otherwise take.
What do you think? Do you or would you carry an emergency beacon on the trail? Do you think these so-called Yuppie Hikers should be hit with an additional fine for calling in the cavalry?
Web Hosting by ReadySetConnect
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
As a member of the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Cave and Technical Rescue Team, I’m a big fan of the SPOT. I would rather have 10 accidental searches in order to save 1 person who really needed a rescue than have that person die.
I let people know where I’m going and approx. when I will return. I don’t even carry my cell phone on a hike. I am 59 and have been hiking for 50 of them. I never had these electronic do-dads as a safety net. Part of the outdoor experience is being prepared, having a map and compass (amd my 10 essentials), and being self reliant; the other part is having the vague thrill that the outdoor experience is potentially dangerous. It’s the OUTDOORS for cripes sake. I go there to get away from civilized stuff.
I think I read the same article as you yesterday. If I recall correctly, the inexperienced father and son team hiking the Grand Canyon called saying they had tasted water that was “a little salty.”
I think that it’s outrageous for for people to scramble search and rescue teams at the first sign of inconvenience. It’s the equivalent of calling 911 when McDonald’s stops serving breakfast in the morning. There should be a fine AND penalty imposed on people that abuse this privilege. The real problem is that people think these beacons are safety blankets and probably take on trips that are beyond their experience level. Perhaps a class on proper usage and basic outdoorsmanship should be required before the purchase of a beacon.
That being said, I’m not totally against the idea of a personal locator. Even seasoned hikers, skiers, mountaineers, etc. can get into trouble. But these are the type of people less likely
I agree with LN, but my wife who worries a great deal about me when I’m out on my own. So I have a SPOT, and I use it for the “I’m OK” feature. Without that, I’d be a lot less free to enjoy my solo hikes.
Alan M’s idea of a required class sounds good, but that would simply be more regulation – hiking licenses, anyone? Who knows, in our hyper-litigious society, maybe it’ll come to that. I wouldn’t know how to implement it. Maybe severe penalties after the fact if it’s determined to be an unnecessary call for help. No, wait, now we need regulations written up in detail to define “unnecessary”. Yup, it’s a conundrum.
@Dave, Is it true that search and rescue teams can actually use your cell phone, even if it is out of range, to locate someone that is lost? Theoretically, this makes sense, but I don’t know if that’s actually done by search and rescue teams.
I bought a SPOT to save time and money while traveling internationally. Why go find an internet cafe when you can simple press “OK” on the device to let 10 of your friends and family know you’re alright?
It has been an essential item in my backpack, either long backpacking trips or short day hikes. Like you, Casey, I’ve never had to use mine for emergencies – and I hope that I never do – but it’s good to have in case the worst occurs. Like the saying goes, I hope for the best but plan for the worst. And “worst” does not include drinking stream water that tastes “a little salty,” or, like another article I read, hearing my camping mate snore in his tent but think he’s having breathing problems.
This reminds me of John Krakauer’s case against bottled oxygen (and guides) on Everest that it puts people on the mountain that shouldn’t be there and aren’t at the correct skill level.
I think the device should come with a warning that the person will very possibly be charged for their own rescue if their situation is deemed to be not that serious. And that people who are not really in danger (and given that is a little subjective) should be charged. Then, at least, people will think twice before using them to determine whether they feel they are in thousands of dollars of danger or not.
In August I was day 3 of a 40 mile through hike when my 2 friends and we came across a group of hiker, one of which had a broken ankle. And when I say “broken”, I mean his knee faced 12 o’clock and his toes were at about 3:30. Thankfully for him, my two buddies were a ex-Navy Corpsman and an ex-Physical Therapy Tech. They triaged him, splinted him up, and monitored him until help arrived. We were they over 4 hours before a ranger arrived and another 2 before a helo was overhead…and that was considered FAST. We got lucky that the runners the group sent out found a ranger at a station 3-5 miles away at Merced Lake; this station normally isn’t manned. Unfortunately there was a lost hiker too and that ranger was deployed to that emergency. The ranger that came to us came about 6 miles in from Little Yosemite. The options for getting the hiker out were hand-carried liter, mule drug litter, or helo. The first two would have taken into the following day to complete.
Looking back, he was lucky that they found a range so easily and lucky to get help in six hours. Had it been a “bad day” we could have been there over 24 hours waiting for help. It defiantly made me realize that any sort of beacon that can speed up rescue is worth it’s weight in gold. I’m about to move cross country and am loosing my hiking buddies. I will be picking one of these “Yuppie Beacons” up for myself for future solo hiking as an added level of safety. Even if I never have to use the device, having been in a situation where it could have helped get an other hiker emergency attention a little quicker, makes the device worth it for me.
I hope to see more hiker on the trails with these in the future. I also hope to see hikers use the devices for true emergencies only; because there could be another hiker lying in the brush that is in real need of help. These devices are, new for most of the population; I think it will take a couple of years for everyone to an understanding of where when and how to use them both appropriately and effectively.
I don’t have one but would probably carry one if I had it. I do take my cell phone with me. I’m not a big hiker though mostly just exploring out while I’m camping. See you tomorrow at the Gore summit Casey!
@Dave Bullock and I share our SPOT. While it’s great to reassure loved ones that we are ok, I also think it’s important to be mindful of self-sufficiency. Calling in SAR for the sake of having to spend a night on the trail would be a huge waste of resources vs sustaining an open fracture.
I tend to agree with Dave, the chance of bogus responses are outweighed by the possible saves from even one response. It’s a form of social insurance,
But let’s not forget where the blame is. It is not the device that is inherently flawed, it’s a certain (hopefully small) group of people who abuse it. Is this issue really any different from the people who call 911 because McDonald’s ran out of McNuggets? No one is suggesting that 911 be dismantled over that abuse.
I am intrigued by the article’s suggestion that just because people have the device, they’ll attempt tougher trails than they normally would.
My friend and I carry the SPOT on longer hikes to reassure our wives that we are okay. You can’t stop irresponsible SPOT use any more than you can keep people from leaving their trash in the wilderness. I’m all for more education but not regulation. How about the 3 guys from SB Co that didn’t pull a Wilderness Permit before they got stranded by high storm flows in Kings Canyon? They were okay, but SPOT could have given everyone some peace of mind, and a wilderness permit could have helped some, but that’s just how it goes.