If they are going to climb MT Hood ( for an example) why are they NOT made to wear these devices as if they get lost,injuried like the 3 did last year. Why must the rescuers risk their lives when the hikers need help. It would seem like it would make it a lot safer and easier for everyone .
If the hikers do NOT have these devives they should be made to pay the money back that it took to rescuse them compared to a $2-500.00 device
After all no one made them climb the montains.

This is an excellent idea! They should have people check them out on the way up and save a lot of time and trouble. You are smart!

Excellent suggestion! That being said, l hate to burst your bubble: As with most ideas that make perfect sense, such as your idea, we as humans will do the complete opposite. If this idea were ever tabled by a government organization, it probably would not pass unless an elected official could profit from it. The only thing we could be sure of, is a drastic increase in the price of GPS devices, should this idea ever be considered as law.

Though the idea is logical, a lot of hikers hike to get away from the hubbub & technology of the city & do not like the idea of someone knowing where they r every second.

Even if they were wearing tracking devices, they would still need to be rescued if they became lost or hurt. The time to find them may be decreased, but a rescue attempt may still be costly because chances r wherever they r lost will not be readily accessible.

Also, if the tracking device was simply for tracking & not like a communication device of some sort, if they r lost or hurt, they still have no way of getting that message out to emergency services & they may remain lost & or hurt for several days until someone starts to worry.

So. My advice is, bring the GPS or the like & know how to use it. Leave a detailed itenerary with more than one person. Check in with rangers as often as possible & if u change ur itenerary, let people know.

do u know how many hikers r there? a lot. do u think everybody can afford a$2-500 device? no way. u cannot make everybody wear these especially the ones that r experienced in hiking & know what they r doing. & do u think hikers & mountain climbers r the only ones that need to wear these? there r so many other sports that people get lost in. regular everyday people get kidnapped lost & everything imaginable to them. so do u think everybody should wear tracking devices?
i agree with u that if the climbers need the rescuers help, then they not only owe them the money the spent, but much more.but l seriously doubt that hikers would be willing to spend that much on these devices, when they know what theyre doing. maybe a good idea to new hikers that have never went outside before..

You can not make people follow safety guidelines. l think if people r smart they will bring stuff that will get them out of the worst case scenario with them when they venture out into the wild. Having said that l spent three weeks climbing in the alps sometimes in avalance conditions ins some pretty hairy places & did not have an avalance transiever or even an avalanche probe between us.

It is the same as saying why r not people who go out fishing made wear transievers all the time.

Because this is not China!

Do not get me wrong, l love the idea of a quick rescue. Also l personally use one of these devices when l venture into dangerous territory. While l take full responsibility for my own safety (or lack thereof) l also want the best chance of rescue should something bad happen. l also believe that the rescued need to be held responsible for public funds spent on S&R. However, forcing every hiker/climber/outdoorsman to carry such a thing is a violation of privacy l certainly would not be willing to give up.

The only way l would back such a program is if it were privatly funded (non-profit, etc.) & offered to the public for free & used at the public is descretion.

There is something wrong when rescue efforts r supposed to be on a volunteer basis, & all climbers assume personal risk----it is a WILDERNESS, u know---and suddenly the law is swooping down on everybody in the mountains, forcing them to wear ankle bracelets, so to speak? Next thing u know, all climbers would have to be licensed to enter mountains. When l go up into the mountains, my idea is to get as REMOTE & far away from people as possible, & that includes the endless piles of obligations society places upon an individual. Yes, l can die up there---my greatest fear is actually rattlesnakes, as a matter of fact, because I've arlready run across too many of them---but that is my choice & my chosen risk. Just b*** out with the idea of imposed GPS tracking.

It would not surprise me if such a technology becomes more common in the near future. More & more serious wilderness participants r incorporating technologies which can aid in their rescue including GPS systems, Epirbs, Satellite or cell phones & Argos tracking systems. However, l think at this point in time there r several valid reasons why tracking systems r justifiably not required of hikers:

1. It is a free country & we try to limit forcing people to do things, even if their own stupidity has social costs.

2. A tracking system may let u know where someone is, but this does not do anything if someone does not know they need help. A cell phone, radio, (possibly combined with GPS) or Epirb is a more effective way of letting somone know u need help & informing them of where u are.

3. The number & percentage of hikers who get lost & need to be rescued annually is very small. The reason it is news worthy is because its rare. The number of serious hiking incidents annually can be covered in part of a news report. The number of murders & driving fatalities in a single day r so numerous, we do not even try. Money spent on stop lights & other measures to prevent car accidents, the number one killer of young adults would probably be a more cost-effective use of funds.

4. Policies vary from area to area, but in many areas, climbers or other people needing rescue r billed for the cost of their rescue. On the water, the coast guard has a policy of rescuing people, but not the thousands of dollars of equipment they may be leaving behind. Compare this to our emergency rescue services in urban areas & on roadways which r usually funded through tax payer dollars. Nobody made people drive in bad conditions, drive drunk, talk on their cell phones while driving, or drive too fast for conditions, but we help them anyways at the cost of our tax dollars & that costs astronomically more than the handful of climbers or hikers requiring rescue annually.

l think ur comment brings up many interesting social & ethical issues & l for one am interested to see how the combination of personal freedoms, social responsibilities & technological advancements play out in the future.