"After the bear attack, the NOLS group was able to punch a button on a personal locator beacon (PLB) that sent an immediate call for help with their location coordinates. But the signal didn't tell anyone the nature of the emergency. Rescuers had no way of knowing the group had at least two critically injured people. If rescuers had known that information, they might have immediately sent to the scene a fully equipped Alaska National Guard medical team, only 35 flight minutes away in Anchorage, troopers said. And that crew would eventually be called to the scene, but not until eight hours after the PLB button was punched."

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/anatomy-alaska-bear-mauling-rescue

Wow, glad to read none were killed.

Lee

Thanks for posting that. That is the best account of the details that I've read so far. It's one heck of a story.

One of the details that sticks out to me is the fact that the rescue center that receives the satellite signal immediately tries to contact whoever is on your contact info for the PLB. Whoever that person is needs to know a lot about you. In my case, my satellite phone number and my cell phone number are on there and then I list two family members cell phones as contacts. Those family members know a lot about me, what I'm driving, my medical history, a list of my gear, my skills, and the fact that I carry some survival equipment. They also know that I would never press the PLB button unless I am in really bad shape. Hopefully that information will elicit a more immediate response.

That's something I've been thinking about a lot as of late. Here's a hypothetical situation that's scary; imagine you run into bad buys in the woods (eg grow farm for pot, a meth lab, etc) and you're wounded. If you hit your PLB you'll get SAR, not a fire team. Without having any idea of the nature of the emergency the rescuers could find themselves in a world of hurt. It would be a nightmare if they expected a lost hiker only to stumble into an "active shooter" situation.

That's why we still need a simple "inexpensive" satellite texting device. I realize some of the latest plb's allow lines of text to be sent.

Although the SPOT might have helped, what they really needed was an appropriate response! Although a two way com might have helped, the real problem in this case is the lack of response capability. If there had been a helicopter at Anchorage ready to go, there could have been help within an hour.

The other problem here is our expectation. We have had PLB's for only a few years now. But we expect wilderness rescue within hours. The system is just learning to deal with this type of notification. We expect the same response we get from 911 on our cell phones (which often takes longer than we would like, even in the city). We have become used to instant response. I hope that it will come in the near future, but in many places it is not here yet. Just 10 or 15 years ago, the notification would have come when the event was scheduled to be over, when the pickup came in to get them.

As a philosophical rant, something is also lost when we have instant communication in the wilderness, is it truly wilderness any more? One of my favorite lines from Calvin Rutstrum's "Paradise Below Zero" is a statment made to him as the boat that brought them into northern Canada and would not be back for a year, "Now, dammit, at last we can holler for help and not be heard".

Respectfully,

Jerry

You raise an interesting point. I go into wilderness and wild places in order to disconnect and to seek solitude, one of the defining characteristics of the wilderness experience.

I think that is why I have been somewhat resistant to obtaining a PLB. For years, I have managed without one, and have reaped the rewards of self-sufficiency and reasonable preparedness. I am not anxious to twitter and facebook when out in the wilds, not even a little bit.

Delorme's inReach two-way texting satellite device is supposed to be ready for prime time on October 1, 2011. I've been holding off upgrading my Spot 2 to see how this will fare, but two-way texting is very enticing.

Getting rescued in 9 hours in Alaska is freaking excellent, I can't believe they're complaining.

I'm glad to see this more detailed article, but like most journalists the writer hasn't done the homework necessary to write with authority.

Observations:

1) The latest SPOT-2 device has a more sensitive GPS receiver that is very good at receiving GPS coordinates. However its transmitter has a very tough time getting a signal out through tree cover and is quite sensitive to the orbital position of the receiving satellites. The McMurdo FastFind was a wise choice by NOLS, IMO, given the technology available at that time.

2) The SPOT-2 won't send a specifically medical message unless it is preprogrammed before the trip to do so. And, this message must be one of the less-than-emergency messages; the text of the "SOS/Send the Cavalry!" message CANNOT be specified by the user.

3) Ultimately, the 'slow' response was due not to any technical difference between a McMurdo and a SPOT-2 but by the cultural and operational practices of the responding authorities. By analogy, it's like a tactical team getting ambushed and blaming the event on being equipped with 9mm instead of 40S&W.

How long would it have taken the author to Google the above info, 1 hour? Less?

IF the author knew the right questions to ask.