And anything that unnecessarily sends SAR teams in increases the risk to the people responding. Here is something that is currently making the rounds of the mountain rescue community: "Yuppie 911"
The link was sent to us by Matt Scharper, Deputy Chief State SAR coordinator, Office of Emergency Services, Sacramento.
Hmmmm again. Yes, that's a good point and, if looked at strictly from a statistical evaluation, it's not impossible that the risk to SAR people is increased from an increase in (bogus) responses vs. the benefit of risk being reduced by narrowing the search area and the time in the field, as well as the number of teams and flights that respond. In spite of several very hyped unnecessary activations, I'd say there isn't enough data to make a determination. I actually talked to a tech today at GEOS/SPOT response center and asked if he had an estimate of bogus activations. He said they're very few.
Also, such an evaluation would make my head hurt. They're two different groups: people who really need help and people who don't. We're still in the early stages of these gizmos and, with luck, will figure out some way of reducing their unnecessary use.
Although the "Yuppie 911" quip is pretty good, it's definitely not a yuppie thing. In my experience, all age groups and income levels have been misusing them (I speak here as a slightly offended member of the Yuppie cohort, though not income...). As such, I prefer "mommy button."
g.
