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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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