You raise a good point. While I generally wouldn't change my behavior or the type of trips I take, I might be willing to do more things solo than I otherwise would. The existence of a PLB therefore perhaps increases my risk taking -- if you count solo trips as per se risky.

Interestingly, there have been studies that have reported that groups are more likely to have accidents in the wilderness. Some of it may be due to peer pressure. Some of it may be due to "I'm with a group; I feel safe" thinking.

In other words, the idea that solo travel is in and of itself more risky isn't necessarily true. The idea that it's safer to travel with a group assumes that the individuals don't relax their vigilance when they join a group, a poor assumption.

HJ

Well that turned out better than expected...

Having a PLB as a last resort is a great asset in the survival toolbox. Making foolish decisions and taking additional risks by knowing that it is there, is a matter of self discipline and judgment.

Similar to the discussions in the hiking solo thread. People may take more risks when hiking in a group, because they know the group can help bail them out.

Most everyone is willing to take more risk when they know there is a backup plan. The simple fact that most of us carry gear in the back country causes us to accept additional risk. At the same time, we're willing to accept some form of additional risk because we believe we're properly prepared to handle that risk.

All in all, going solo is riskier. Overall, your chances of getting out of anywhere alive is greater in a group. There are always cases where that is not the case. But they are the exception and the same may not hold true the next time around.

For the wise, it boils down to risk tolerance and what you are willing to accept. For the unwise, stupidity leads them astray. We will all have times when we make foolish actions in the spur of the moment, that may even go against our risk tolerance level. In those moments, we may get excited by the rush; however, we must also accept the resulting consequence, whether good or bad.

First, I think your wrong that this forum favors PLB as a problem solver over personal responsibility or education/ability to self-rescue. Its not a black ball comment, but it is an incorrect statement.

PLB's, EPIRBs, flares, laser flares, strobes, cell phones, survey tape, soap stones, signal mirrors, whistles, bright clothing, should be treated as nothing but a technique. Some with obvious technological accelerators.

Second, I carry the SPOT2 and it has not changed my hiking, trail running, camping at all. I am not personally more risk prone nor more risk tolerant of those around me. My trail pals are as competent or more competent than I. There are still areas where I run, hike that my first line of defense when in trouble is my side arm and not my SPOT. Not that I have needed to produce either, but I have both. -And that is not hyperbole. Prospectors in many areas of the Superstition Mtn's will ward off people from their search areas with firearms.

Is that circus still going on? Back in the 50's I had the experience of looking down the barrel of a prospector's 1911 Colt, clearly aimed at my COM. Excessive politeness secured my survival.

I believe the USFS had declared the Sups off limits to mineral exploration back in the 70's....I'll bet there is more gold in my fillings than in the entire Superstition Range.

Oh, yes, indeed they will.

Also, try hiking down the E. Fork of the San Gabriel River some evening like some friends of mine did recently as they were getting back from a hike late. The prospectors working various "claims" really got excited.

HJ

First, I never intended to convey the forum favors PLBs as a problem solver over personal responsibility. I don't think I stated it as such either. You're the first to conclude that. But those less experienced readers of the forum could prematurely draw such conclusions. That was the reason for posting this thread.

Second, if your conclusion of your personal behavior is such that your preparations have not made you more confident in the back country, that's fine. For many, and I would claim most, it does make them more confident. And with that confidence, most accept more risk in their decisions. There are always exceptions. Your level of self diciplin is to be commended.

This reminds me of something that happened more then a few years back. There was a fair (National Trail Day?) at the local open space preserve that included both the park rangers and the Sheriff's SAR team. I asked them both the same question: "What equipment or skill would you like hikers to have?"

The park ranger suggested a jacket and a book of matches. Then he related a story about an unexpected overnight where he lite two campfires and slept between them.

The SAR member told me to "Carry a cell phone and a GPS"

Building on that.

Let me interject a little additional balance in this debate. Just for a moment, let's look beyond the individual, however independent, come what may, I am responsible only for myself, attitude. All well and good when there were no viable, affordable alternatives. That is no longer the case.

Very few of us live in a vacuum. When we don't return from a trip, or something untoward occurs during a trip, stuff happens, very little of it without negative consequences.

Family and friends are affected. SAR personnel are put a substantially increased risk.

Personally, I think it is beyond selfish and self-centered when you decide not to take along an inexpensive device that addresses these issues. A PLB saves so much more than your life.

It is NOT a substitute for being prepared, but it is an essential part of being prepared. There is simply no excuse not to carry a PLB at this point.

Just my not very humble opinion, of course.

Thank you Doug! I fail to see how adding an additional safety device equates to taking greater risks. For years when hiking or trial riding on horses I’ve always carried supplies for a unexpected night out, first aid supplies and signaling devices and that sure hasn‘t caused me to take any greater risks! In fact my preparedness awareness probably has taught be to be more careful as well being more vigilant before proceeding into a potential risky situation. I always carry my cell phone and my vehicle is equipped with On-Star and those sure don’t entice me into situations that I wouldn’t have taken in the days before cells and On Star.

I can’t speak for everyone who might invest in a PLB and how they might view it in regards to taking additional risks or not being prepared with conventional supplies, but heck I drive a 4WD vehicle too and don’t go rip roaring around on snow or ice covered roads either.

Of course there was the now notorious incident in the Grand Canyon where irresponsible activation of a PLB launched three helicopter sorties that were completely unnecessary. I don't believe that was a unique incident of frivolous PLB activation.

Flying in a helicopter in the Grand Canyon meets my definition of "substantially increased risk," which, incidentally, is not characteristic of the typical SAR mission.

PLBs cut both ways, in my opinion.

However, I agree with your overall point which is quite an admission from a luddite like me, growling at the rear of my cave. One reason is that I got along for many decades without a PLB, depending upon good fortune and finally, a bit of expertise. However, a good, light, and cheap PLB does seem like a rational purchase. I am intrigued by the new offering from ACR.