A Bill to Require Beacons for Mt. Hood Climbers
By Rocky Thompson on December 21st, 2009
Pending legislation in Oregon would have every climber attempting a Mt. Hood ascent carrying a rescue beacon that could be rented for about $5. The beacons are basically line-of-sight locators. You don’t flip one on and sit back and wait for a helicopter. Someone needs to know you’re missing, and then they can use the locator beacon to find your signal once they get close enough. These beacons likely wouldn’t have saved the three climbers who died in the recent tragedy on Mt. Hood as the conditions were too treacherous for rescue.
Both sides are weighing in with strong opinions and surprisingly logical arguments. The basic points of the governmental side are that they pay for rescue, so they want to mandate the usage since it helps them concentrate their search in one area and spend less money. Climbers argue that it robs from the freedom and mystique of mountaineering, plus it might make inexperienced hikers take risks they normally wouldn’t since they have this beacon fallback plan.
Ideally they would just loan the beacons for free and everyone would use them. Actually, it would be even more ideal if only people who were going to get lost would rent them. Problem solved.
I’d say that all the mystique and freedom isn’t worth squat when your on the verge of hypothermia and death. Look at Chris McCandless (”Into the Wild”), someone who absolutely THRIVED on the aspect of being on his own and living precariously in the wild without the ability to call for help. His final written note was pleading for rescue, quote: “…I am injured, near death, and too weak to hike out of here. I am all alone, this is no joke. In the name of God, please remain to save me…” People need rescue in two types of situations. The first is when some unforeseen circumstance that noone could have predicted (ie a sudden storm that no weather service could have predicted). The second is when stupid/untrained/no-common-sense people make the same reckless decisions they always make, irregardless of the circumstances. People who take unnecessary risks do it no matter how prepared they are, and would likely make the same bad decision whether or not they have a locator. Fully informing people that the locator is NOT a surefire safety net would be important.
Hood has taken a toll the last few decades, it’s a lure for marginally skilled climbers, and a bunch of them lately have had a one way trip. The beacon rule is a good idea. If some guy wants the freedom and mystique, just don’t set it off when you get in trouble. I’m guessing “freedom and mystique” is more of a warm home ideal and goes away when TSHTF on the mountain when .
I think that any time you try to mandate common sense it is a bad policy. And tommyboy has no idea how an avalanche beacon works. You do not “set it off when you get into trouble.” Unless removing your pack, jacket, opening the harness, and turning a beacon on is something you want to be doing during a slide.
I carry a sat beacon all the time while hiking and climbing and some, like SPOTS, can be set to track so they’ll show your last known location even if you get knocked unconscious. However, the only reason Hood - and climbers - make the headlines is because TV and the papers got a big taste of media crack when that helicopter crashed in 2003. Free footage everywhere. Action! Cheap drama! Hand-wringing editorials! So now the ambulance chasers are ready to pounce every time a sheriff’s scanner goes off.
Satellite beacons make an excellent idea for most all wilderness adventurers simply because expertise is never a safety guarantee (this is a common conceit of climbers and whitewater kayakers), and because they take the ’search’ out of search and rescue. Still, a lot of people can’t even use the gps they bought, and administering loaner programs would be a pain. I can imagine the lawsuits if a beacon ‘failed’ because the batteries were dead or the victim dropped into a deep crevasse.
As to the ‘crazy climber’ backlash, over the past week at least three sea kayakers died in separate incidents that resulted in expensive searches in Hawaii, New Zealand and Lake Superior. Another search off the British coast turned up a survivor. Where’s the outrage there? It’s all about the media, not the problem, like back when Sonny Bono slammed into a tree and suddenly everybody ‘had to’ wear ski helmets.
But yeah, most adrenalin junkies, even rope-ducking skiers and boarders, aren’t remotely prepared for an accident. No first aid. No extra clothing. No signaling capability. It’s all ‘fast and light’ Koolaid.
herb, why is mandating common sense bad policy, I don’t understand? Is mandating not to steal or stopping at a red light bad policy? Those are common sense ideas. Also your confusing an avalanche RECCO reflector and an avalanche transceiver beacon. Reflectors don’t need to be turned on, they simply reflect the single when it hits them (these are very short range). Beacons are self-powered and send out their own signal pulse, which requires power, and thus must be turned on manually.