The San Diego Union Tribune printed an interesting article regarding the plethora of inexpensive personal locator beacons that have stormed the market in the last year or so.  (read the article here)  Do they save lives, or do they encourage the owners to attempt trails and conditions that are beyond their experience and skill level knowing that they have an out if they get in trouble?  The debate has raged since their release  To be fair, one must also look at the benefits of these devices, as they do have potential to save lives.  The SPOT Satellite GPS Messenger, one of the most popular PLB type devices, has stories on their website of people helped by activating their devices.  (You can read them here)

As indicated by the article, several Search and Rescue Agencies are contemplating gathering data on the number of calls, and the type of calls that are being generated using these devices.  Compiling this data then will give an accurate picture of the value of PLB’s vs. the detriment. Or will it?  Who is to judge what is a “life threatening” situation? Will the dead hiker with the PLB sitting in his pack be accounted for in the statistics?

I currently do not carry a PLB.  I would, but purchasing one has not been a priority.  I value my sound judgment and conservative nature when in the backcountry.  I would like to think that carrying a PLB would not change my judgment.  What it would do is give my family at home an extra layer of comfort knowing that I could pull the plug if things got out of hand.   I would like to think that the majority of people who hike are like me. The stories in the media seem to prove otherwise.  Is this reality or media hype? Unfortunately these are the same people who tend to get themselves in situations where they need these devices.

Are PLBs  making us safer?  What do you think?

UPDATE:  Casey over at Modern Hiker read the same article as I did on PLBs, and provided his take on them here.