HikeArizona.COM

Finally.... prudent use of a SPOT....

Grand Canyon National Park (AZ)
Rangers Rescue Injured Man From Elves Chasm

Park dispatch was notified of the 911 activation of a SPOT satellite locator device in Elves Chasm around 1 p.m. on the afternoon of Friday, November 13th. The chasm consists of a series of waterfalls and pools in a high-walled canyon about 30 miles downriver from Phantom Ranch. The 911 activation of a SPOT device transmits location coordinates and a non-specific emergency call for help. A second activation at the same location was reported approximately 30 minutes later. At the time of these activations, the park’s helicopter was unable to respond due to high winds and poor visibility, so a plane already in the air on another mission was dispatched to fly reconnaissance over the area. About an hour later, dispatch received a satellite phone report from a private river trip leader advising that a 39-year-old man had fractured his lower leg in multiple places when he took a fall in Elves Chasm. Because their satellite phone was not getting a signal at the time, a member of the group activated the 911 function on their SPOT device. Now in contact with the group, rangers were able to work with them over the phone to consider their self-rescue options. Unfortunately, self-rescue was not possible, and weather conditions did not improve enough for the helicopter to fly that evening. With over-the-phone guidance from park rangers, trip members made the injured man comfortable for the evening. Early the next morning, he was lifted from Elves Chasm by short-haul (suspended on a 150-foot line below the helicopter) and transported to a flat area where he could be loaded into the helicopter and flown to the South Rim helibase. From there, he was transported by ground ambulance to Flagstaff Medical Center. Although there has recently been a great deal of publicity about 911 activations of SPOT devices for non-emergencies, this situation exemplifies the value of these devices when used appropriately in emergency situations.

Glad he made it out ok. That is one beautiful place...i'm going back there this April.

So the hiker with the broken leg did not have the SPOT ... but a river trip group had a SPOT and a satellite phone? Sounds like the guy was pretty lucky. And it emphasizes that a SPOT should not be relied on for survival. It's a helpful tool in an emergency, but if this guy wasn't prepared himself (or helped out by a group of people who was prepared) things could have been much worse.

Even with a satellite phone and a SPOT, this guy didn't make it to a hospital for 24 hours after his injury. That's a long time if you're not prepared to deal with the emergency.

The news blast is not clear (to ME at least) on whether the injured party was on the river trip or was a backpacker later 'saved' by the river trip.

hikeaz wrote:The news blast is not clear (to ME at least) on whether the injured party was on the river trip or was a backpacker later 'saved' by the river trip.

Thats what I was gonna say...side note..that area is visited more so by rafters than by hikers.

And what difference would that make?

Mike Coltrin
Tucson

chumley wrote:So the hiker with the broken leg did not have the SPOT ... but a river trip group had a SPOT and a satellite phone? Sounds like the guy was pretty lucky. And it emphasizes that a SPOT should not be relied on for survival. It's a helpful tool in an emergency, but if this guy wasn't prepared himself (or helped out by a group of people who was prepared) things could have been much worse.

Even with a satellite phone and a SPOT, this guy didn't make it to a hospital for 24 hours after his injury. That's a long time if you're not prepared to deal with the emergency.

The above is what we were responding to.

mikehikes wrote:And what difference would that make?

A big difference if he was hiking and helped, but not such a big deal if he was with the rafters.

What would the difference be?

Mike Coltrin
Tucson

mikehikes wrote:What would the difference be?

Mike Coltrin
Tucson

Assuming he was a solo hiker (since no other hikers were mentioned), and had the rafters not been there with the emergency devices (SPOT, satellite phone), how would the situation have ended differently?

mikehikes wrote:And what difference would that make?

Let me back up here...What are you referring to here?

mikehikes wrote:What would the difference be?

What are you referring to here?

azpride wrote:Assuming he was a solo hiker (since no other hikers were mentioned), and had the rafters not been there with the emergency devices (SPOT, satellite phone), how would the situation have ended differently?

Good way to put it. He may or may not have been found for several days...What capacity would he be in...etc.,etc.
The article doesn't clearly state what Kurt alluded to.... you don't know wether the injured party was a backpacker or part of the river party.
I think it makes a big difference...others may disagree.

rlrjamy wrote:mikehikes wrote:
And what difference would that make?
Let me back up here...What are you referring to here?

mikehikes wrote:
What would the difference be?
What are you referring to here?

Since none of the 'what if's' happened. And that 'what happened is what happened'. What difference does it make if the fellow was a backpacker or a river runner? As far as I can see this was a report of a guy with a broken leg at Elves Chasm that was rescued partly by the use of electronic devises. I don't see where the conjecture makes a bit of difference.

Mike Coltrin
Tucson

mikehikes wrote:Since none of the 'what if's' happened. And that 'what happened is what happened'. What difference does it make if the fellow was a backpacker or a river runner? As far as I can see this was a report of a guy with a broken leg at Elves Chasm that was rescued partly by the use of electronic devises. I don't see where the conjecture makes a bit of difference.

That's whats so great about the internet..everyone can express how they feel about something. I totally disagree with how you steered this dicussion and your conclusions.. but your obviously entitled to them. That's why I said...others may disagree.

On further review.....

Let me appologize for asking questions that probably can only be answered by hypotheticals then criticizing the responses. That was unfair of me.

Mike Coltrin
Tucson

mikehikes wrote:hypotheticals

http://store.teambuildinginc.com/items/ ... m/list.htm
Not that I have a vested interest or anything ;)

Wow. I miss a couple of hours and the thread explodes!

For the record, my post was only to suggest that regardless of if he was hiking or rafting, the use of technology didn't get him to a hospital for 24 hours. So regardless of how he got injured or who he was with, its good that he (or people who encountered him) was prepared to deal with an emergency situation.

Its a lesson for everybody: hikers, bikers, rafters, etc. Technology can be a useful tool, but you had still better have your basics taken care of, because technology alone isn't going to save you in an emergency.

chumley wrote:Wow. I miss a couple of hours and the thread explodes!

Yeah..see what you started ...I think you need to buy a beer for anyone who posted in this thread .

rlrjamy wrote:...I think you need to buy a beer for anyone who posted in this thread .

One of these days we should really do that. I still owe Joel a couple for 255, but our schedules didn't align. There's a few weeks of pumpkin porter left, and then we move on to the 2010 winter wobbler! But I think we might have to wait until January to attempt to organize something since November/December tends to be pretty busy for most people.

chumley wrote:One of these days we should really do that.

I still owe you one from Red Creek and that was back in February... that's why I wanted to solve #255 so bad ;) .

chumley wrote:There's a few weeks of pumpkin porter left

I thought you were cussing at first and I got all confused