As I mentioned in a previous post, Gloria and I have been around the Superstition Wilderness area for about the last 20 days. We were very close to the guy that broke his kneecap and laid on the ground for 6 days awaiting rescue . In fact, the rescue helicopter went over us, did a sharp bank (presumably when they saw the mirror flash) and dropped behind a nearby ridge.

He did not have an amateur radio with him, but if he did, I would not have heard his calls, although I was well within radio range. The reason is, I do not normally keep my radio on, monitoring 146.52 as specified in the wilderness protocol. There is just too much chatter on that frequency. Especially when we are at 6000 ft. We can hear stations from Phoenix to Flagstaff. I feel bad about not monitoring, but when we are listening to a ranger talk about the medicinal use of a particular plant, or about the wall construction used 1000 years ago, or we just want to enjoy the peace and solitude, I just can't have a radio on with some folks doing idle chatter 70 miles away. So it gets turned off. And I don't keep track of time, so I seldom turn it on during the hourly “monitor” period.

I wonder how many other hams use the wilderness protocol? How often? If not, why not?

Perhaps it is time for a small change so we could monitor more effectively. I suggest using CTCSS tone 100 when monitoring. That way we would not hear the chatter, but anyone seeking assistance or wanting to call another ham could use the 100Hz tone to open our squelch. A quick call and back to carrier operation for the conversation. I set up two memories. One, memory 52 = 146.52 carrier squelch. The second, memory 53 = 146.52 CTCSS 100Hz. It is easy to flip back and forth between the two.

I know there are problems with this idea. It is more complex and not all rigs have CTCSS. However most made within the last 20 years do and I doubt that there are many hams carrying 20 yr old “bricks” backpacking in the wilderness.

I bring this here for discussion, because we on this forum are probably more likely to have experience with the wilderness protocol and I solicit your comment before I take the idea to other venues.

Would you be more likely to monitor 146.52 T100 than 146.52 Carrier Squelch? Would using CTCSS mode be “too complex” to warrant the potential increase in monitoring stations?

I solicit your comments, either here or via PM.

Thanks,
Ron Gregory, N1AHH. Still near the Superstition Wilderness Area in Arizona.