Backcountry Forum
Backpacking & Hiking Gear

Backcountry Forum
Our long-time Sponsor - the leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear
 
 
 

Amazon.com
Backpacking Forums
---- Our Gear Store ----
The Lightweight Gear Store
 
 WINTER CAMPING 

Shelters
Bivy Bags
Sleeping Bags
Sleeping Pads
Snow Sports
Winter Kitchen

 SNOWSPORTS 

Snowshoes
Avalanche Gear
Skins
Hats, Gloves, & Gaiters
Accessories

 ULTRA-LIGHT 

Ultralight Backpacks
Ultralight Bivy Sacks
Ultralight Shelters
Ultralight Tarps
Ultralight Tents
Ultralight Raingear
Ultralight Stoves & Cookware
Ultralight Down Sleeping Bags
Ultralight Synthetic Sleep Bags
Ultralight Apparel


the Titanium Page
WM Extremelite Sleeping Bags

 CAMPING & HIKING 

Backpacks
Tents
Sleeping Bags
Hydration
Kitchen
Accessories

 CLIMBING 

Ropes & Cordage
Protection & Hardware
Carabiners & Quickdraws
Climbing Packs & Bags
Big Wall
Rescue & Industrial

 MEN'S APPAREL 

Jackets
Shirts
Baselayer
Headwear
Gloves
Accessories

 WOMEN'S APPAREL 

Jackets
Shirts
Baselayer
Headwear
Gloves
Accessories

 FOOTWEAR 

Men's Footwear
Women's Footwear

 CLEARANCE 

Backpacks
Mens Apparel
Womens Apparel
Climbing
Footwear
Accessories

 BRANDS 

Black Diamond
Granite Gear
La Sportiva
Osprey
Smartwool

 WAYS TO SHOP 

Sale
Clearance
Top Brands
All Brands

 Backpacking Equipment 

Shelters
BackPacks
Sleeping Bags
Water Treatment
Kitchen
Hydration
Climbing


 Backcountry Gear Clearance

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#122915 - 10/26/09 09:25 AM PLBs and False Alarms
totempole99 Offline
member

Registered: 09/12/04
Posts: 127
Loc: Memphis, TN
Didn't want to hijack DJ2's thread on PLB Education, and debated whether or not to put this in the Gadgets forum, but think this is the place for it.

"Tired from a hike? Rescuers fear Yuppie 911"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33470581/ns/us_news-life/

And the associated poll (with an overwhelming answer)
http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2009/1...ency-situations


I guess I never realized how popular these had become now that they have come down so low in price; but it makes sense to me that more people would have them when considering their price and the fact that our society is ever more dependent on technology.

Would you guys want a penalty or to pay restitution for those who active their PLB in non-emergency situations? And how do you draw the line between emergency or non-emergency situations? Or will there always be gray area? Should you have to sign some sort of paperwork/contact when purchasing one of these devices that states you will be responsible for costs incurred in non-emergency situations? Or attend a class to know how to use them?

I've never looked at getting one, but I think these should be tougher to get than just ordering one off the internet. Because then there are all those yahoos in the article with these, putting an even bigger strain on SAR.


I've never had one in my hand, so I don't know, but are they easy to activate? I always thought the button(s) were kinda like in climbing where you arrange the carabiners in an opposite and opposed fashion. So, while not difficult to do, to active the PLB requires conscious thought and decision. Can someone help me here?

Top
#122917 - 10/26/09 10:07 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
finallyME Offline
member

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 2710
Loc: Utah
I think the problem is that a private company sells the technology, but the public picks up the tab for someone getting rescued. If a public entity is going to do the searching, then the person getting rescued should pay the tab. And the tab includes $20 an hour for a volunteer's time. Let's face it, hiking is a recreational activity. You don't HAVE to go. And, if you do go and get into trouble, then you have to decide how much your life is worth. That will lessen the frequency of non-emergency calls, and pay for the ones that do.
_________________________
I've taken a vow of poverty. To annoy me, send money.

Top
#122921 - 10/26/09 12:52 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
Rick_D Offline
member

Registered: 01/06/02
Posts: 2939
Loc: NorCal
Yeah, saw that. This isn't new, nor is it limited to PLBs, but it's not hard to imagine the problem will become widespread in a time when emergency service budgets are slashed everywhere.

I'm liking the concept of rescue insurance policies more all the time. There's no way I'd support some kind of tribunal that would decide who had to pay for rescue and who did not. That rather defeats the point of having the capacity at all. That said, if the state or county or whomever wanted to go after a blatant abuser in civil court, that's fine with me. There's precedent with fire services.

I question the article's implication that the technology is emboldening folks. Many of these emergency calls were once referred to as "suspected human remains found, possibly hunter missing two years."

Cheers,
_________________________
--Rick

Top
#122922 - 10/26/09 12:55 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
I agree that misuse of PLBs is a real problem. Notice I said "misuse of PLBs" and not "PLBs" - as with most other things, it's putting good technology into the hands of idiots that's the problem, not the technology itself. (Proof: "Hi, I'm at the grocery now, in the canned goods aisle. Little Bobby just pulled a bunch of green beans down..." - cell phones are very good technology; unfortunately, there are idiots who think someone actually cares where they are every second.)

I definitely believe that triggering a rescue in non-emergency situations should either result in the individual paying the costs or (putting cost aside and recognizing there is significant risk to the rescuers) made a high-level misdemeanor or low-level felony - and prosecuted. Yes, there would need to be definitions of "non-emergency."

I would tentatively argue that, even in emergencies, the rescued party should bear the cost of the rescue. I'm not arguing that people should never go in harm's way, or be prohibited from venturing into the wilds. However, when we do so, we go accepting the risk that something could go wrong - why shouldn't we also be willing to accept the responsibility to pay for it? It then becomes just another risk management situation: we try to minimize the risk by training, planning, and experience, but it can never be taken to zero risk. With that model, the person heading out can also make the choice to obtain "rescue insurance" by paying a small premium (perhaps a way to finance SAR organizations?), or "go bare" and assume the responsibility for full payment in case of rescue. (This model also protects the right of the rugged individualist NOT to call in a rescue in an emergency, and get him/herself out the situation on his/her own.) In short, might this be a key that fits the backcountry door (to borrow a concept from Colin Fletcher)?

Thoughts?


Edited by Glenn (10/26/09 12:59 PM)

Top
#122923 - 10/26/09 02:10 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
Zalman Offline
member

Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 97
Loc: Olympic Peninsula, Washington,...
Aside from the question of ultimate financial responsibility, the idea that those desert hikers were able to call for rescue 3 times in one trip is astonishing to me. If someone purposefully calls for rescue, perhaps they should not be given the option of declining it when it arrives. Trip over!

In this case, such a rule would have cut 2/3 of the "rescue" costs.
_________________________
It's easy to be a holy man on top of a mountain.
-- Larry Darrell

Top
#122927 - 10/26/09 02:56 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
scottyb Offline
member

Registered: 05/28/08
Posts: 278
Loc: Texas Hill Country
Backpacking in the backcountry is a risk and the participants should assume they are solely responsible for their own rescue and that there is a possibility that nobody will come rescue them. This point is made clear over and over in the video that comes with a Grand Canyon's backcountry permit. If rescue does come, it should be the resposibility of the participant for payment, period.

Diving and backpacking are similar in that people are voluntarily participating in an activity that has some inherant risk. A lot of diving takes place in a foreign country, where it's possible that no treatment will be offered without pre-payment or a verifiable guarantee, at a minimum. Dive accidents often require very expensive, low altitude evacuation, to reach the nearest recompression chamber that's required. There are a couple of world-recognized agencies (D.A.N. and P.A.D.I to name a couple) that offer yearly insurance policies to cover these types of expenses. My experience is that a good percentage of divers carry this type of insurance and I would never dive without it.

I'm not sure if anything like this exist for backpacking but I do know that many travel insurance policies offer medical evacuation coverage.
_________________________
Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.... Pericles (430 B.C)

Top
#122928 - 10/26/09 03:10 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: scottyb]
bigb Offline
member

Registered: 07/05/09
Posts: 124
Loc: Maryland
I actually thought PLB's were for rescue only, meaning if you don't return when your supposed to some one could call SAR and say he has a PLB and is in such and such National Forest.

I had no idea you could call 911 so to speak, WOW, big suprise people would abuse that. Peaople will use it for chinese food and pizza soon.
_________________________
"In the beginers mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert's there are few."
Shunryu Suzuki

Top
#122930 - 10/26/09 04:25 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Glenn]
ringtail Offline
member

Registered: 08/22/02
Posts: 2296
Loc: Colorado Rockies
My City charges for false burgular and fire alarms. They do NOT charge for the real thing.

I do not think we should charge for searches, but the rescue is medical transportation and their insurance should cover it.

In the past it was difficult to charge for SAR because the people being rescued had not contracted for the services. Generall it was something like grandma called and reported grandson overdue and a search was conducted in the vicinity of where his car was parked. It seems to me that when you push that button you have agreed to pay. When the police call an ambulance you have the right to refuse transport, but not when you call it.

Sorry but there should be a charge for the backcountry rescue, maybe health insurance will pay the cost, but only if medically necessary.

Did I throw out enough ideas Glenn?
_________________________
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."
Yogi Berra

Top
#122933 - 10/26/09 05:37 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: ringtail]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
You sure did. I particularly appreciated the "who calls SAR" issue - it's something I'd forgotten about. In the case of PLB's it's definitely the person in trouble who triggers the search.

However, I'd forgotten about the individual who's simply late, and someone calls in for a rescue. In that case, I'd tentatively agree that the "innocent" hiker who is late, but doesn't need a rescue, shouldn't have to pay for it. ("Tentatively," because the hiker is the one who said to grandma/wife/girlfriend, "If I'm not back by Tuesday, let someone know.")

Also, there is the argument that, if the SAR unit is government-funded, "we" have already paid for it by paying our taxes.

Not an easy issue, for sure.

Top
#122934 - 10/26/09 05:42 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Zalman]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
Good point. I agree - if you push the button, you don't get a do-over. Even if it's a mistaken triggering. (I assume you can leave the thing turned off, which would eliminate sending the mistaken signal.)

Top
#122936 - 10/26/09 06:10 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Glenn]
ringtail Offline
member

Registered: 08/22/02
Posts: 2296
Loc: Colorado Rockies
Originally Posted By Glenn

Also, there is the argument that, if the SAR unit is government-funded, "we" have already paid for it by paying our taxes.


That is the reason I cite the false burglar alarm charge. When someone reports suspicious activity at your house there is no charge for a service call. When your alarm goes off and a crime has been committed there is no charge. When your cat sets off the alarm there IS a charge.
_________________________
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."
Yogi Berra

Top
#122940 - 10/26/09 07:09 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: ringtail]
OregonMouse Online   content
member

Registered: 02/03/06
Posts: 6799
Loc: Gateway to Columbia Gorge
I think PLBs and SPOTs are being confused here.

The Grand Canyon "hikers" had a SPOT, per the NPS press release (unfortunately I can't access it right now, but the text was copied here).

With a PLB, you register it with the US Coast Guard. At the time you register, you receive dire warnings about hefty fines and imprisonment if the button is pushed when it is not a life-and-death situation. That's because the PLB uses the government satellite network. To the best of my knowledge, there have been few false alarms with a PLB--the few I've read about were severely punished.

A SPOT uses privately owned satellites, so pushing the button when it's unnecessary is not a violation of federal law. It's the satellite network that calls 911. Unfortunately. I suspect that at some point either these gizmos will be banned or laws will be enacted posing restrictions similar to those on PLBs. Or (thinking of the boy who cried wolf story), the authorities will start ignoring signals from SPOTs.

This is a really scary situation because it puts the lives of the SAR folks in considerable danger for trivial reasons. I hope these guys get a whopping fine if not worse!

I would also like to know why it took three calls before the authorities hauled those idiots out of the Grand Canyon and charged them? IMHO, it should have been done the first time!


Edited by OregonMouse (10/26/09 07:20 PM)
_________________________
May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view--E. Abbey

Top
#122942 - 10/26/09 07:23 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Glenn]
Folkalist Offline
member

Registered: 03/17/07
Posts: 374
Loc: Fredericksburg, VA
My PLB makes my Mom happy (well, less worried anyway). You must purposefully snap the cap/back off, unwind an antenna and then push the button. It can not be used again until it has been returned to the company and reset. (Since, theoretically, you were in serious danger, you are now probably in traction and won't be hiking in the next week or so anyway.)

I can't imagine setting it off accidentally, and the owner gets TONS of information with the packaging and then online when registering the unit. This includes an "I agree/understand" statement. It is absolutely shameful that anyone would abuse this technology and it really makes me mad [angry cat face].

If you make a false call, you should pay. I don't think honest emergencies that were not entered into during particularly dangerous settings or weather should incur a fee, however, I'd still be willing to pay for my own rescue - at least some of the cost.

Ooooh, I'm mad now.
_________________________
Why am I online instead of hiking?

Top
#122943 - 10/26/09 07:32 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: OregonMouse]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
To clarify, anything I said about PLBs would apply equally to the misuse of SPOTs - or cell phones, for that matter.

Top
#122945 - 10/26/09 07:49 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: ringtail]
Rick_D Offline
member

Registered: 01/06/02
Posts: 2939
Loc: NorCal
FWIW this varies by jurisdiction. Where I live we pay a city alarm license fee. We are "graced" IIRC two false alarms per year, and there's a charge for each false alarm thereafter.

We've had two or three false alarms actually called in by the service over the decade or more we've had the system and have not been charged. It seems fair to me, given the license fees we've paid over the years. And it is true, the majority of alarm calls prove false.

Cheers,

Originally Posted By food


That is the reason I cite the false burglar alarm charge. When someone reports suspicious activity at your house there is no charge for a service call. When your alarm goes off and a crime has been committed there is no charge. When your cat sets off the alarm there IS a charge.
_________________________
--Rick

Top
#122949 - 10/26/09 09:06 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Rick_D]
skinewmexico Offline
member

Registered: 09/23/08
Posts: 81
I don't even consider a PLB and a SPOT the same thing. PLBs are usually used by grownups.


Edited by skinewmexico (10/26/09 09:07 PM)

Top
#122955 - 10/26/09 09:45 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: skinewmexico]
dla Offline
member

Registered: 09/06/04
Posts: 275
Loc: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Well that's probably cause you don't know what you are talking about.

Coast Guard Response and False Alarms
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg534/Emergency_Beacons.asp - general Coast Guard information page on EPIRB, ELT, and PLB.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg534/EmergencyBeacons/EPIRBfactSheet.doc - This gives information on the false alarm rate of EPIRBs (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon). EPIRBs are for marine use, PLBs are for land use.

http://www.uscg.mil/announcements/alcoast/ALCOASY231.txt - An official announcement that the Coast Guard treats SPOT emergencies like any other emergency.


Although this thread started because of SPOT misuse, the fact is that the COSPAS-SARSAT experiences a 92% false alarm rate.


Edited by dla (10/26/09 09:52 PM)

Top
#122957 - 10/26/09 09:47 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: bigb]
TomD Offline
Moderator

Registered: 10/30/03
Posts: 4963
Loc: Marina del Rey,CA
911 is reporter shorthand; a PLB does not call 911; it sends a signal which notifies SAR and they come looking for you. A SPOT is different, it is run through one of the SatPhone companies who then contacts SAR, kind of like the way alarm companies work.

911 gets a lot of abuse from people calling to complain about service at fast food restaurants and other BS. Sometimes 911 operators ignore emergencies too, just because they don't believe the person on the phone. Some of the more egregious examples have gotten widespread publicity when the end result was someone dying because the operator didn't believe the person or didn't care.

The first person to use a PLB was arrested the second time he used it when he went back for his gear after the first rescue and set it off again claiming he was too tired to hike out with his gear.


Edited by TomD (10/26/09 09:55 PM)
_________________________
Don't get me started, you know how I get.

Top
#122966 - 10/27/09 09:20 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
Haiwee Offline
member

Registered: 08/21/03
Posts: 330
Loc: Southern California
I don't know much about PLB's or SPOT's, never having used them, but a few things about the story cited bug me. Why was the group in the Grand Canyon not evacuated after the first activation of their SPOT? How did the guy panning for gold get dehydrated? Wasn't he panning on a stream? And why in heck would anyone need to be evacuated from Convict Lake? It's a developed area with paved roads, stores, a restaurant, a campground and cabins. Even if these yahoos were above Convict in the back country the trails are clearly marked and easy to follow; I've hiked out of there at night several times.

I agree we need some sort of legislation to deter misuse of these SPOT devices (I find amusing the "Yuppie 911" nomenclature). Can't see myself using one of these things. I've been backpacking for almost 40 years now, much of it solo, and have only been in trouble once, and that was because I made a stupid mistake of trying to cross a stream in flood.

A lot of this comes down to personal responsibility and experience. Me and two buddies got caught on Donohue Pass in the Sierras a few years ago in a freak early-season snow storm. Our wives had made us carry a satellite phone, yet we never even considered using it -- our experience told us we would make it through the night O.K, and our sense of responsibility told us that to use the phone in that situation would be wrong and dangerous.
_________________________
My blog on politics, the environment and the outdoors: Haiwee.blogspot.com

Top
#122967 - 10/27/09 10:13 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Haiwee]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
Bingo! This is exactly what I meant about putting technology into the hands of idiots.

Technology itself is good; it gives you an additional risk-management tool for those occasions where you've done everything a prudent person could do to prepare for the specific trip, and something goes unexpectedly wrong (freak Easter blizzard in the Eastern US back in the 90s springs to mind, as would a forest fire that got started after your trip began.) In those cases, where you cannot muddle through or get out on your own, you could eventually trigger the technology - and pay the rescue cost, if appropriate. In your case, it had to be reassuring to know that, if the storm did turn out to be longer or more severe than you thought, you had the phone as a last resort. But, you were also responsible enough to know that the first snowflake was not a reason to call for help.

It's the idiots who look at technology as a substitute for planning and experience that cause the problems. Unfortunately, we get some of those people asking us to do their legwork for them. (I remember one standout question: "I'm going to hike the AT starting next month. How much water do I need to carry?" The overwhelming response was along the lines of, "you need to know how to figure that out if you're going to do the AT.") Luckily, some of those folks stick around, and learn how to do the planning and preparation.

The rest, who think that planning is too much like work, and takes all the thrill out of the trip (!) probably run down to REI or EMS, plunk down the money for a SPOT or PLB, and head out the next day - then become a headline: "Hiker uses PLB when canteen is empty."


Edited by Glenn (10/27/09 10:14 AM)

Top
#122970 - 10/27/09 11:26 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: TomD]
billstephenson Offline
Moderator

Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 3917
Loc: Ozark Mountains in SW Missouri
Quote:
he went back for his gear after the first rescue and set it off again


I've never heard that story before, but it sure made me laugh out loud this morning.


Top
#122977 - 10/27/09 12:51 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Glenn]
dla Offline
member

Registered: 09/06/04
Posts: 275
Loc: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Originally Posted By Glenn
Bingo! This is exactly what I meant about putting technology into the hands of idiots.

Technology itself is good; it gives you an additional risk-management tool for those occasions where you've done everything a prudent person could do to prepare for the specific trip, and something goes unexpectedly wrong (freak Easter blizzard in the Eastern US back in the 90s springs to mind, as would a forest fire that got started after your trip began.) In those cases, where you cannot muddle through or get out on your own, you could eventually trigger the technology - and pay the rescue cost, if appropriate. In your case, it had to be reassuring to know that, if the storm did turn out to be longer or more severe than you thought, you had the phone as a last resort. But, you were also responsible enough to know that the first snowflake was not a reason to call for help.

It's the idiots who look at technology as a substitute for planning and experience that cause the problems. Unfortunately, we get some of those people asking us to do their legwork for them. (I remember one standout question: "I'm going to hike the AT starting next month. How much water do I need to carry?" The overwhelming response was along the lines of, "you need to know how to figure that out if you're going to do the AT.") Luckily, some of those folks stick around, and learn how to do the planning and preparation.

The rest, who think that planning is too much like work, and takes all the thrill out of the trip (!) probably run down to REI or EMS, plunk down the money for a SPOT or PLB, and head out the next day - then become a headline: "Hiker uses PLB when canteen is empty."


How often does that happen? Do you know? How do you know you aren't being played by the media? I even read one poster suggesting we need "legislation" - WOW!

Maybe folks should get a grip.

Top
#122981 - 10/27/09 02:20 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: dla]
Glenn Offline
member

Registered: 03/08/06
Posts: 2617
Loc: Ohio
You're right - there is an assumption here that the media is not blatantly lying to us. I don't know how to prove or disprove that.

However, my own anecdotal evidence suggests they aren't lying.

For many years, four or five times a year, I've encountered hikers (or groups of hikers) whose first question is, "Do you know where we are?" My usual response is, "Do you have a map?" and the invariable reply is, "No." (Or they have a totally insufficient NFS "trail map" that doesn't show creeks, ridges or any other topography. I try to tell them how to get where they're going, but they also don't have any pencils or paper to write down directions or sketch a map. I'm sure that their "plan" is to encounter another hiker on down the trail, or maybe there'll be a sign...

I've also encountered hikers who complain that they don't have cell service, "That's just ridiculous that They don't put towers out here in the wilderness! What if we needed to call for help, or needed to know where we were?"

Idiots.

One fall night, around dusk, after we made camp about 8 miles from the nearest trailhead and were settling in for the night, a group of 10 folks came down the hill into our camp, wondering if we knew how far it was to "the parking lot." Once we figured out which parking lot they were asking about, we told them it was about 10 miles. They said, "Oh." We said we didn't really have any gear to spare, but we could probably round up enough food for supper and would help them build a fire for a little warmth to make it through the night. They said, "No, we'll just hike back."

"Do you have maps?"
"No."

"Do you have flashlights?"
"No."

"Anybody bring a jacket?"
"No."

"How are you fixed for food and water?"
"Everybody started with a bottle of water; a couple of us didn't toss them when they were empty. We don't have a filter."

"Food?"
"None."

Then they set off up the trail - which was both rugged and high. I have no idea if they made it out safely.

Like I said: idiots.

Top
#122983 - 10/27/09 03:54 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Glenn]
billstephenson Offline
Moderator

Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 3917
Loc: Ozark Mountains in SW Missouri
Glenn, that happens to me every year here too.

I quit going to the Buffalo River for several years in a row because every trip turned into a rescue mission.

I once had a guy, two women, two kids, and their big dog, float up on two inner-tubes at 2 in the morning to the shore where I was camped. They only had one wet towel and an empty cooler with them. Their campsite (and car) was over five miles downstream.

They told me, "Well, it's too far to keep going so we'll just spend the night here with ya'll. My wife and I fed the kids and the dog and loaded them all up in my Suzuki Samurai and drove them to their camp. We got back to our camp around 5:00 am.

For me, that was the last straw. I still go there and hike, and canoe during the middle of the week, but never on a summer weekend or holiday.



_________________________
--

"You want to go where?"



Top
#122994 - 10/27/09 08:33 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: dla]
phat Offline
Moderator

Registered: 06/24/07
Posts: 4107
Loc: Alberta, Canada
Originally Posted By dla

How often does that happen? Do you know? How do you know you aren't being played by the media? I even read one poster suggesting we need "legislation" - WOW!

Maybe folks should get a grip.


There *is* a fine for PLB misuse here. and you'll get charged for rescue costs. But I agree here - The story smells like a nice sensational media story to sell copy. I see no facts and lots of sensationalism like "Yuppie 911".

One factor you are potentially not considering is that all that doom and gloom and Yuppie 911 talk and legislation talk actually prevents people from taking them when they should. and using them when they should.

Case in point. I have one. I didn't take it on a hike last year because I had cell phone in all but an 8km section of pass, and figured it was not an "emergency" if I was anything but dead on a popular trail and could send one of the frequent passers by to the nearest end to phone for me. etc. etc.

I was given the what for by several members here (as well as a friend who flies SAR) who told me not to be an idiot, that if I was truly in trouble even if it wasn't immediately "life or limb threatening" - that if I was gonna be overdue they'd end up looking for me anyway - it would be better if I just pressed the button - saves them time in the air, and effort (and risk on their part) in finding me.

That is not to say that people being idiots with them doesn't happen.
_________________________
Any fool can be uncomfortable...
My 3 season gear list
Winter list.
Browse my pictures


Top
#123002 - 10/27/09 11:18 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
Paul Offline
member

Registered: 09/30/02
Posts: 778
Loc: California
In Europe, rescue insurance is common for mountaineers. Probably what would be a good idea is to have a rescue insurance program that is part of the purchase of a SPOT or PLB. In other words, you pay an extra $20 or so when you buy it, and that signs you up for the insurance. Since the vast majority of units will likely never be used for an emergency, you have lots of people paying $20 each and just a few actually being rescued.
SPOT actually has a rescue insurance program available on their site as an option - $7.95 per year. Just make that a part of the deal instead of an option, and there you are. Especially simple with SPOT, since you have to have an annual subscription anyway.

Top
#123005 - 10/27/09 11:59 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
wandering_daisy Offline
member

Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 2865
Loc: California
It is not black and white. Once the county sheriff is involved they take over and nobody else has much to say about what is being done. I have seen some rescues over-done- a helicpoter sent in when a horse packer would have done just as well. They are just like doctors who do not want to be sued for a botched rescue. Thus, I do not think the rescued person should necessisarly pay all the costs. But I do think everyone should pay a share. I would say, at a minimum of a couple hundred dollars - kind of like use-fee. Also, if you "push the button" you should be required to go out regardless. None of this "oh, I am better now". On one hand you do not want false alarms but you also do not want people to hesitate to call when they really need help for fear of having to pay thousands of dollars. After all the SARs are volunteer organizations and the sheriff's guys are already being paid. It is their job. There will always be in most cases those who really needed a rescue and those who clearly did not and a hopefully smaller "gray area". If there is insurance - it should remain voluntary. I have no plans of either getting insurance or carrying a PLB.

Top
#124098 - 11/20/09 01:52 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: Paul]
NiytOwl Offline
member

Registered: 11/06/04
Posts: 501
Loc: California
Quote:
SPOT actually has a rescue insurance program available on their site as an option - $7.95 per year. Just make that a part of the deal instead of an option


I think you're omitting that some people who buy SPOT are using it as a personal tracker - small businesses with individual tracking needs for instance. Wouldn't really be fair to make them pay for rescuing the adventurers, would it?

That said, it would be foolish not to take some preventative action, because we're about to witness a lot more "Yuppie 911" calls. When Jill and Joe I-Am-Invincible think they can do anything now that they have help just a push-button away, THEY WILL. And when they get in over their heads, they will push that button. If they didn't have that button to push, they likely would have exercised more caution in their trip planning. So how do we provide the safety net without emboldening these risk-takers? Everyone has to pay for rescue. Push the button and pay. You incur fees just as if you called the ambulance.

This does not mean we won't rescue those who have no money any more than we refuse to treat indigent patients. Everyone gets rescued and everyone gets a bill. Those with health plans may be covered, and the rest could buy "Rescue Insurance" or take their chances.

Top
#124221 - 11/23/09 12:41 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: NiytOwl]
dla Offline
member

Registered: 09/06/04
Posts: 275
Loc: Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Originally Posted By NiytOwl

That said, it would be foolish not to take some preventative action, because we're about to witness a lot more "Yuppie 911" calls. When Jill and Joe I-Am-Invincible think they can do anything now that they have help just a push-button away, THEY WILL. And when they get in over their heads, they will push that button. If they didn't have that button to push, they likely would have exercised more caution in their trip planning.


I don't think that is true. Not at all. That's like the idea that allowing people to carry concealed weapons will result in gunfights all over the place - never happened. And "yuppie 911 calls" won't happen either.

SPOT/ACR/McMurdo have been around for a while. The SAR folks haven't been overwhelmed with "yuppie 911" calls.

SPOT/ACR/McMurdo do empower folks with a new level of responsibility and preparedness for backcountry travel. But very few thrill junkies can find a way to get in trouble and make "yuppie 911" calls. There are always going to be rescues of "stupid" people who set off uneducated and unprepared. But SPOT/ACR/McMurdo would really help in these situations - saves SAR a lot of time and money. Overall these devices are money-savers - people carrying them should get a reduced rate.

Top
#124517 - 11/29/09 11:13 AM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: totempole99]
scottyb Offline
member

Registered: 05/28/08
Posts: 278
Loc: Texas Hill Country
Yesterday, I watched a newly released, on DVD, movie called "Canyon". It was not a good movie, mostly inaccurate, including the addition of wolves in GC, but the storyline hits home. Two people, totally unprepared, uneducated, underequipped, getting themselves into trouble. Sadly, the book "Over the Edge; Death in Grand Canyon" is full of real stories like this.
_________________________
Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.... Pericles (430 B.C)

Top
#124548 - 11/30/09 05:04 PM Re: PLBs and False Alarms [Re: dla]
NiytOwl Offline
member

Registered: 11/06/04
Posts: 501
Loc: California
Quote:
I don't think that is true. Not at all. That's like the idea that allowing people to carry concealed weapons will result in gunfights all over the place - never happened.


No, but it DID result in the rate of robberies and assaults dropping, didn't it? Cause and effect. You are just choosing one possible effect and citing it to "prove" your point when other effects disprove it.

I put it to you this way. Since the cell phone has become so commonplace, non-emergency calls currently make up about 2/3 of the total number of calls to 911, with a significant part being "stupid" calls (asking directions, locked keys in car, want to know what's holding up traffic). What happened? Cell phones have been around for DECADES. Why the increase? Because they got CHEAP, just like PLBs and other emergency signaling devices are now getting cheap. Cheap means lots of devices floating around - and some inevitably get into the hands of "stupid" people.

Let's face it - there are some REALLY STUPID PEOPLE in this world. When those people have devices like PLBs and SPOTs, the same thing that happened with cheap cell phones will happen with those devices too. They will use them inappropriately. Except in this case, there is no two-way conversation, no way to determine if this is a "stupid" call or not. You have to treat every activation like a real emergency.

You see, I don't have to prove that abuse will happen, because it already does happen every day with 911 calls. Now can you imagine the chaos if, like PLBs, cellphones only had a "911" button on them? No way to get any more information other than "This is an emergency"? Officers would be rolling to calls for someones turkey that didn't cook right, or because somebody got the wrong order from Burger Thing. Translating this to PLBs - "I forgot my sleeping bag and thought that I could just tough it out", "A 'possum got in our food and now I think everything's contaminated", "We ran out of toilet paper, do you have some?"

Yeah, these calls from "stupid" people sure are gonna save SAR a lot of money. Right. Just remember to buy my new backpack stickers that say "Push the button and PAY!"

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Shout Box

Highest Quality Lightweight Down Sleeping Bags
 
Western Mountaineering Sleeping Bags
 
Lite Gear Talk - Featured Topics
Backcountry Discussion - Featured Topics
Make Your Own Gear - Featured Topics
Featured Photos
Spiderco Chaparral Pocketknife
David & Goliath
Also Testing
Trip Report with Photos
Seven Devils, Idaho
Oat Hill Mine Trail 2012
Dark Canyon - Utah
Who's Online
0 registered (), 199 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Noodles, McCrary, DanyBacky, Rashy Willia, WanderBison
13240 Registered Users
Forum Links
Disclaimer
Policies
Site Links
Backpacking.net
Lightweight Gear Store
Backpacking Book Store
Lightweight Zone
Hiking Essentials

Our long-time Sponsor, BackcountryGear.com - The leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear:

Backcountry Forum
 

Affiliate Disclaimer: This forum is an affiliate of BackcountryGear.com, Amazon.com, R.E.I. and others. The product links herein are linked to their sites. If you follow these links to make a purchase, we may get a small commission. This is our only source of support for these forums. Thanks.!
 
 

Since 1996 - the Original Backcountry Forum
Copyright © The Lightweight Backpacker & BackcountryForum