Why does the debate on SAR charging for rescue or not, come up on this forum so much? This topic and bear spray vs guns should be banned as both have debated far past any sense of reasonable discussion, too many times over.

The truth and the fact of the matter is many SAR teams choose not to charge for rescue. Here in my area, one of the most elite teams (North Shore Rescue) in North America, do not charge for rescue and they pervasively detail their reasons here.

http://www.northshorerescue.com/services/charging-for-rescues/

Thank you for providing a very reasonable, logical, and elegant statement in support of non-charge rescues.

But really, how frequently does this topic arise on ETS? How many threads have there been in, say, the last two years? Could you please cite them? I honestly don't recall all that many...

I wasn’t really discussing charging for rescues, just using a PLB to shift some of the cost of a search to the rescuee by making the search very short and limited to a 100’ radius (accuracy limitation of the PLB). You spend $244 and if you ever need rescue, it’s there and SAR doesn’t need to spend a lot of time and money (regardless of who pays) looking for you. It’s just an opinion.

Its cheap peace of mind - even at $244 for the resqulink.* Not perfect, by any means, but so small and easy to use, I recommend them to everyone who goes off pavement.

(* the battery is rated for 5 years and needs to be replaced by the company)

I guess "cheap" is relative, but certainly above $100 I don't spend the dough without consulting my better half about the state of finances.

Furthermore, the premise that obtaining any gadget and thereby securing "peace of mind." which sounds to me very much like "complacency." is highly questionable.

True peace of mind results from the true knowledge that one is trained and equipped to deal with the obstacles out there. Especially important is obtaining the skill sets and knowledge because, unlike PLBs and other objects, they cannot be left behind or misplaced.

The first reliance should be on one's self and the group, rather than on outside assistance. Not that there is anything wrong about calling for help when appropriate, but take care of yourself first.

I am a bit if a Luddite, probably because I have been romping around in the hills and valleys for more than sixty years, taking care of myself and frequently others, without a PLB. $244 will buy a good climbing rope, which frequently will be just what the doctor ordered (as well as other gadgets too numerous to mention).

As I am normally responsible for the safety and security of others when I am out, I carry both a PLB and an inReach 2 way communicator. These are not considered a primary option for safety or communication, but supplement the plan. There is always a good plan (think PACE), proper equipment (including visual signaling and cell phones) and training for the environment and how to survive there.

I have used the inReach to track students and communicate out (when there is no cell phone signal), but have never had the need to use the emergency signaling capabilities of the inReach or PLB. Even though we have at times dealt with bad conditions, injuries and potential emergencies, the plan and other equipment always got us through it.

It is nice to know I have the emergency signaling capabilities though.

A PLB is insurance when things go sideways -- a Plan B so to speak. A good plan with the relevant skills to execute will always be Plan A, but when things don’t go as planned...

I started carrying a PLB as gear on my aviation survival vest. The aircraft had an ELT but sometimes aircraft sink and there goes the ELT. I wanted to ensure an emergency beacon was with us after the aircraft was gone. I don’t fly any more, but the concept remains valid. You don’t plan to ditch, but you should still be prepared for the unplanned.

Certainly when you are responsible for others, a PLB makes considerable sense.