PDA

View Full Version : Yuppie 911



Iceaxe
10-26-2009, 10:11 AM
'Yuppie 911': Novice Hikers Draining Rescue Crews

FRESNO, Calif. (AP) - Last month two men and their teenage sons tackled one of the world's most unforgiving summertime hikes: the Grand Canyon's parched and searing Royal Arch Loop. Along with bedrolls and freeze-dried food, the inexperienced backpackers carried a personal locator beacon -- just in case.

In the span of three days, the group pushed the panic button three times, mobilizing helicopters for dangerous, lifesaving rescues inside the steep canyon walls.

What was that emergency? The water they had found to quench their thirst "tasted salty."

If they had not been toting the device that works like Onstar for hikers, "we would have never attempted this hike," one of them said after the third rescue crew forced them to board their chopper. It's a growing problem facing the men and women who risk their lives when they believe others are in danger of losing theirs.

Technology has made calling for help instantaneous even in the most remote places. Because would-be adventurers can send GPS coordinates to rescuers with the touch of a button, some are exploring terrain they do not have the experience, knowledge or endurance to tackle.

Rescue officials are deciding whether to start keeping statistics on the problem, but the incidents have become so frequent that the head of California's Search and Rescue operation has a name for the devices: Yuppie 911.

"Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can take decades to find. "With the Yuppie 911, you send a message to a satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you shouldn't have been in in the first place."

From the Sierra to the Cascades, Rockies and beyond, hikers are arming themselves with increasingly affordable technology intended to get them out of life-threatening situations.

While daring rescues are one result, very often the beacons go off unintentionally when the button is pushed in someone's backpack, or they are activated unnecessarily, as in the case of a woman who was frightened by a thunderstorm.

"There's controversy over these devices in the first place because it removes the self sufficiency that's required in the back country," Scharper says. "But we are a society of services, and every service you need you can get by calling."

The sheriff's office in San Bernardino County, the largest in the nation and home to part of the unforgiving Death Valley, hopes to reduce false alarms. So it is studying under what circumstances hikers activate the devices.

"In the past, people who got in trouble self-rescued; they got on their hands and knees and crawled out," says John Amrhein, the county's emergency coordinator. "We saw the increase in non-emergencies with cell phones: people called saying 'I'm cold and damp. Come get me out.' These take it to another level."

Personal locator beacons, which send distress signals to government satellites, became available in the early 1980s, but at a price exceeding $1,200. They have been legal for the public to use since 2003, and in the last year the price has fallen to less than $100 for devices that send alerts to a company, which then calls local law enforcement.

When rescue beacons tempt inexperienced hikers to attempt trails beyond their abilities, that can translate into unnecessary expense and a risk of lives.

Last year, the beacon for a hiker on the Pacific Crest Trail triggered accidentally in his backpack, sending helicopters scrambling. Recently, a couple from New Bruswick, British Columbia activated their beacon when they climbed a steep trail and could not get back down. A helicopter lowered them 200 feet to secure footing.

In September, a hiker from Placer County was panning for gold in New York Canyon when he became dehydrated and used his rescue beacon to call for help.

With darkness setting in on the same day, Mono County sheriff's deputies asked the National Guard for a high-altitude helicopter and a hoist for a treacherous rescue of two beacon-equipped hikers stranded at Convict Lake. The next day they hiked out on foot.

When eight climbers ran into trouble last winter during a summit attempt of Mt. Hood in Oregon, they called for help after becoming stranded on a glacier in a snowstorm.

"The question is, would they have decided to go on the trip knowing the weather was going bad if they had not been able to take the beacons," asks Rocky Henderson of Portland Mountain Rescue. "We are now entering the Twilight Zone of someone else's intentions."

The Grand Canyon's Royal Arch loop, the National Park Service warns, "has a million ways to get into serious trouble" for those lacking skill and good judgment. One evening the fathers-and-sons team activated their beacon when they ran out of water.

Rescuers, who did not know the nature of the call, could not launch the helicopter until morning. When the rescuers arrived, the group had found a stream and declined help.

That night, they activated the emergency beacon again. This time the Arizona Department of Public Safety helicopter, which has night vision capabilities, launched into emergency mode.

When rescuers found them, the hikers were worried they might become dehydrated because the water they found tasted salty. They declined an evacuation, and the crew left water.

The following morning the group called for help again. This time, according to a park service report, rescuers took them out and cited the leader for "creating a hazardous condition" for the rescue teams.

]http://llnw.image.cbslocal.com/0/2006/05/09/175x131/images_sizedimage_129121017.jpg

http://cbs13.com/local/yuppie.911.hikers.2.1269891.html

Don
10-26-2009, 10:57 AM
Perfect example of someone who should be billed for the rescue. All three times.

Sombeech
10-26-2009, 12:26 PM
Few people actually saw this problem coming.... The technology is great, but it ABSOLUTELY cuts down on the preparation time now.

Just like driving to a friend's house - you used to write down the directions and house description for fear of driving around for 2 hours. Now we hop in the car and call the person asking where they live once we're on the freeway.

A lot of these people would have never gone on these trips without the technology, which is good and bad I guess.

I think one solution is the mandatory removal of the "victim" on the first call, making them understand there's no "checkup service". They mobilize to get the victim out, and that's it.

Alex
10-26-2009, 01:14 PM
I have used SPOT ever since they came out. I never used it for rescue, always used it for family notification. I really think some fee should be applied to calling the rescue on yourself.

Sombeech
10-26-2009, 02:01 PM
I really think some fee should be applied to calling the rescue on yourself.

And especially the 3rd visit like those guys in the Grand Canyon?

How can you seriously call the helicopters out for a 3rd time in the same trip? I just don't get it.

Iceaxe
10-26-2009, 02:46 PM
How can you seriously call the helicopters out for a 3rd time in the same trip? I just don't get it.

You can't fix stupid!

Cirrus2000
10-26-2009, 04:28 PM
How can you seriously call the helicopters out for a 3rd time in the same trip? I just don't get it.

You can't fix stupid!
:nod:

Alex - me, too. SPOT for the family. Absolute last resort for a rescue. I'm not sure how dire things would have to be before I hit that "911" button, but pretty dire indeed. No pressing it if my water tastes a little salty.

I think one of the best things about the SPOT's tracking feature is, even if I don't use it for calling in SAR, it gives a great last known position.

Sombeech
10-26-2009, 06:15 PM
I think the SAR team might have to take a little more blame on this too. They shouldn't have just left after the first visit. It should be procedure to get them out of there, no exceptions. I'm sure they're bound by laws and such, but there's a lot of abuse going on.

If the button was pushed by accident, they should stick to it. This way the person can't lie once they show up and say it was an accident. They've gotta make a priority of preserving that magic button.

denaliguide
10-27-2009, 02:16 AM
i soloed the royal arch loop a few years ago. it is an arduous and potentially dangerous route. that was the main attraction.

that said, i don't own and won't be buying a spot. my family will know i am fine when they see me walk in the door. self sufficency is a lost art these days. gps is bad enough. i do carry one of these on occasion.

i also rarely file a hiking plan or register at trailheads. (i'm so bad.) it's a risk i am willing to take. if i get hurt on one of my solo jaunts chances it will be either self rescue, or no longer an option.

think of guys like doug scott on the ogre, or joe simpson of touching the void fame. it's an attitude. i don't have time for inexperienced wannabe's

if you go with me leave your spot at home. but bring your visa.

ststephen
11-02-2009, 06:10 PM
Interesting. Especially for me since I had that experience I posted about in the backpacking forum of activating my SPOT!

When going with the scout troop it is a nice peace of mind device for the parents at home. Just the feature of being able to send notices of your progress makes it worthwhile for me.

As to using the 911, as I wrote about in my other post under "backpacking", I activated that knowing that we were close enough that now responders would likely go by foot vs. helicopter and knowing that I would be able to communicate with others within a few hours. But I had someone who was in steadily deteriorating physical condition. After the fact, the rangers had no issue with my choice to activate.

That said if they had scrambled a chopper for what turned out to be nothing actually life threatening I would have felt bad about causing that extra risk and cost.

It will be interesting to see how these devices are viewed in a few years with more examples of the good and bad uses.

mfshop
11-03-2009, 11:20 PM
Wow. I just got a plb as a gift, and have been thinking in what situations I would actually use it. Didn't consider they'd call in a heli right away, as opposed to responding on the ground first.

Anyone know the decision process the Utah/local Zion-area SAR would follow in determining how to respond to a plb signal (air vs ground)? It'd be nice to have an idea what to expect if I used it around here.

Also, anyone know if there is a waiting period (ie 24 hrs since last seen) before SAR will start searching for a person reported missing?

jman
11-04-2009, 01:09 AM
Also, anyone know if there is a waiting period (ie 24 hrs since last seen) before SAR will start searching for a person reported missing?

as soon as someone reports them missing or overdue, etc.


But lets say if you tell the rangers you are going on a multi-day trip but don't show up that day your suppose to...I know the rangers don't go out immediately...If I remember correctly, according to my friend with SLSAR, they wait about 12-24hrs, or until the next morning.

Iceaxe
11-18-2009, 10:19 AM
SPOT rescue....

NPS Morning Report November 18, 2009
Grand Canyon National Park (AZ)
Rangers Rescue Injured Man From Elves Chasm

Park dispatch was notified of the 911 activation of a SPOT satellite locator device in Elves Chasm around 1 p.m. on the afternoon of Friday, November 13th. The chasm consists of a series of waterfalls and pools in a high-walled canyon about 30 miles downriver from Phantom Ranch. The 911 activation of a SPOT device transmits location coordinates and a non-specific emergency call for help. A second activation at the same location was reported approximately 30 minutes later. At the time of these activations, the park

TreeHugger
11-20-2009, 01:46 PM
I suppose if they started charging people for the rescues (particularly non-emergent rescues) there would be fewer Yuppie 911s.

ibenick
08-04-2010, 08:51 AM
Thought I'd bring this thread back to life and see if I could get some input on purchasing a PLB. Amongst other reasons, my wife is starting the PMBA program at the U this month which means I'll be doing most trips solo for the next two years. So it has been decided that I must have some sort of PLB.

Yes, I know, these devices are controversial but I believe fully in the idea that this never gets used unless it is the absolute last resort in a life threatening situation. It's really just an insurance policy... would you pay $500 for a one-time insurance policy that could save your life if you were critically injured in the wilderness? I would.

I was originally thinking of the SPOT, especially after reading some of the threads here but after reading reviews on REI and Amazon I'm thinking maybe not. There seems to be a lot of complaints about it being unreliable, easily breakable and the customer service is bad.

After SPOT I was considering the McMurdo Fast Find 210 or the ACR SARLink 406. Both work on GPS as well as the search and rescue homing frequencies and both will work without any subscription costs. The SARLink has the added benefit of the I'm OK function like the SPOT has although that would cost an extra $60 per year. The McMurdo is just plain old PLB, nothing extra, no I'm okay, nada, to be used only in extremely dire rescue situations. Cost of the McMurdo, $249, ACR $399. Oh and the McMurdo is only about 5 oz compared to over 8oz for the ACR. Nice considering it would likely never be used.

Anyway, does anyone here have anything other than the SPOT? Any opinions on the subject?

McMurdo Fast Find 210
http://www.rei.com/product/791972

ACR SARLink 406
http://www.rei.com/product/798479

cachehiker
08-05-2010, 09:23 AM
Perfect example of someone who should be billed for the rescue. All three times.

I never posted originally but I think charging them with misuse of public services would be in order. If found guilty, you would be expected to pay restitution.

paul4886
08-08-2010, 12:22 PM
After thinking hard about buying a Spot and after a severe sprain incident on a day hike I decided to spend the dollars on 'The Spot'. What I find lacking is a strong narative on rational reasons to use the 'SOS' feature. The documentation just up sells the capability of the SOS feature. Even their web site in thier FAQ section has no guidance for using the SOS feature. Yes, with the Spot II, they have added a cover to the SOS button to avoid unintentional activaition of the SOS call but lacking rational guidance for using SOS, I believe, opens the door for 'stupid user' abuse. Taking the time poll Search and Rescuse organizations and craft a proper narative and including this with the prpduct an posting on their web site, to me, would have been a logical thing to include with their product.

Rented mule
08-08-2010, 02:43 PM
right on, Denaliguide! I have taken enough baby steps and learned from experience to be quite self reliant. A unit like that would probably give me a false sense of security.
I don't want it. Don't need it. Damned thing probably wouldn't work when I wanted it, anyway. Ya can never get a cab when you need one, right? hehe

ibenick
08-09-2010, 02:36 PM
After thinking hard about buying a Spot and after a severe sprain incident on a day hike I decided to spend the dollars on 'The Spot'. What I find lacking is a strong narative on rational reasons to use the 'SOS' feature. The documentation just up sells the capability of the SOS feature. Even their web site in thier FAQ section has no guidance for using the SOS feature. Yes, with the Spot II, they have added a cover to the SOS button to avoid unintentional activaition of the SOS call but lacking rational guidance for using SOS, I believe, opens the door for 'stupid user' abuse. Taking the time poll Search and Rescuse organizations and craft a proper narative and including this with the prpduct an posting on their web site, to me, would have been a logical thing to include with their product.

I agree. That SOS button should be a big topic and it's not. That's why you get these idiots that use it for something other than what it is for... to save your life when that is the last option.

I went ahead and got the spot as well. I personally believe that no amount of self sufficiency is worth gambling my life... I like it too much. There will always be scenarios that you just plain cannot self-rescue and that is what these types of devices should be for. These jackasses that use it irresponsibly should be charged all costs and forcibly removed from the wilderness if they then decline rescue.

DSTRBD
08-12-2010, 08:51 PM
I think it should be as simple as this:

You push the 911 button and SAR comes, when they get there they access the situation, and if you have "yuppie 911 syndrome", the ranger or sheriff or whomever has the right to ticket you for lets say "misuse of public resources", if you are found guilty based on the evidence brought against you in court (like a speeding ticket or whatever), you pay the fine (equal to the cost of the full rescue) if you use it as a "luxury rescue" then you pay for the luxury of having someone come get you.

I "might" get one, BUT I know what my personal limits are (I have taken summer and winter survival courses) and I think it would take alot for me to push the button.

Just my .02