Re: Satellite Emergency Notification Devices: signalling gizmos
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:47 pm
Here is my thinking, for what it is worth.
I was an early adopter of SPOT and have never regretted it or had any kind of failure with it.
It is true that if I fall and hit my head the SPOT is not going to spontaneously call for help. But it is far more likely that I might have a heart attack, or serious altitude sickness, or a bad sprain or break that required transport. So if the device can deal with 90% of my potential emergencies should I not carry it because it can't deal with 10%?
But in fact it would help with the 10%. I do send messages at each major intersection/lake/pass/campsite that I pass and this would dramatically narrow the search area for any SAR.
I take many precautions about not accidentally or carelessly activating the 911 function. I don't see how that would be possible in my case.
I am not compulsively addicted to communication devices. I am part of the .0002 % who do not even own a cell phone. I am saddened as I watch people increasingly live their lives in a technology mediated world. I like SPOT precisely because it is not two-way communication. I can only use it to reassure others or to summon help, but since I cannot receive any information on it, it does not invade my feeling of solitude.
I do understand the minimalist approach. I respect Colin Fletcher's decision not even to take a watch into the wilderness. But I cannot make my decisions in a self-centered way. I must realize that my own pleasure in the wilderness experience depends upon taking the risk that I could worry my family or expose a SAR crew to expense and danger. I feel that I have an obligation to do what I can to prevent this, or else I am placing my own pleasure above the chance that I could inflict harm on others.
I was an early adopter of SPOT and have never regretted it or had any kind of failure with it.
It is true that if I fall and hit my head the SPOT is not going to spontaneously call for help. But it is far more likely that I might have a heart attack, or serious altitude sickness, or a bad sprain or break that required transport. So if the device can deal with 90% of my potential emergencies should I not carry it because it can't deal with 10%?
But in fact it would help with the 10%. I do send messages at each major intersection/lake/pass/campsite that I pass and this would dramatically narrow the search area for any SAR.
I take many precautions about not accidentally or carelessly activating the 911 function. I don't see how that would be possible in my case.
I am not compulsively addicted to communication devices. I am part of the .0002 % who do not even own a cell phone. I am saddened as I watch people increasingly live their lives in a technology mediated world. I like SPOT precisely because it is not two-way communication. I can only use it to reassure others or to summon help, but since I cannot receive any information on it, it does not invade my feeling of solitude.
I do understand the minimalist approach. I respect Colin Fletcher's decision not even to take a watch into the wilderness. But I cannot make my decisions in a self-centered way. I must realize that my own pleasure in the wilderness experience depends upon taking the risk that I could worry my family or expose a SAR crew to expense and danger. I feel that I have an obligation to do what I can to prevent this, or else I am placing my own pleasure above the chance that I could inflict harm on others.