Lost hunter rescued because of flashlight...

Interesting Anchorage Daily News article about a lost hunter in Alaska rescued because of a Princeton Tec 40 - perhaps saved his life!

awesome....

all the more the reason to carry one all the time /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

good story. sounds like he had a good flashlight with him.

did you see the credit for that (unrelated) lodge fire picture? ""(Courtesy of Alaska State Troopers)""
it probably isn't practical for the newspaper to send a reporter out long distances for small stories.

saw this pic page, nice. www.knls.org/English/picpage.htm

It's a good ending to the story. Sensible too - to get his wife to stand by and ring in if he did not return by a specified time. It would suck to be sitting out there for a couple of days or even overnight especially without lunch (what, no lunch? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif)

I checked up on the PT 40, interesting little light, alkaline powered. "28 lumens" claimed - I usually derate that by half to get metrics comparable to Surefire lights. So he was saved by something with the power of an E1e. Awesome. I tried the MN01 the other day and it was a total washout.

Imagine what a lithium powered Space Needle/Lux3 could do.. there are times when insane throw DOES come in useful - imagine being able to signal aircraft overhead at 1000ft. With 330+ yards of throw and enough light to identify what I'm looking at, heh...

I think the plane at 1000 feet could see the E1e just fine. Best of all would be if the guy had a 2-way radio.

A man goes hunting, miscalculates where he left his boat, then immediately sits down and waits to be rescued by the Coast Guard (knowing that his wife will call the Coast Guard when he is one hour overdue).

Umm, excuse me, but the Coast Guard is not a taxi service. That little "rescue" probably cost untold thousands of taxpayer dollars. I hope they send him a bill.

If he had a map and compass and used them, he would not have lost his boat in the first place. Better still, a GPS. How about a little self-reliance?

I was taught (in the boy scouts) that when you get lost, it's best to stop in a visible place and wait for help. Blundering about does two things. It makes it more likely that you might go even further astray and creates a situation where they are looking in area X while you are in area Y, and by the time they get to Y you are in X.

In our area, I'm pretty sure the rescued party pays something.

On the other hand, (noting the line "That little "rescue" probably cost untold thousands of taxpayer dollars") if no overtime was incurred and the distance was small, the cost to the tax payers may have been zilch.


I could be wrong. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Daniel

Sometimes, waiting for rescue is a good idea. Other times, it is a death sentence. There really isn't any hard and fast rule, but I would say that attempting to get back to civilization is generally a good plan. Search and rescuers often have no clue where a person is, or even that a person is lost.

Mark your path for rescue trackers. You could leave bits of bright colored clothing or shiny objects on your trail.

In a wilderness environment even an experienced person familiar with the area can get lost.
Disorientation can cause you to not believe anything you see. Landmarks don't make sense, the gps MUST BE WRONG, & have you ever used a compass in Alaska, that can get you confused & lost by itself in some areas.

When you go out always have rescue plans in place.

Without all the facts we can't say what he did was the right thing to do or not. With the limited info I have & personal experience added to it, I'd say he probably did the right thing under the circumstances.

One thing I consider to be a major mistake in this adventure.
HE WAS ALONE!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/whoopin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/whoopin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/whoopin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ohgeez.gif

Theepdinker

I would agree that he had an excellent plan for getting rescued. He stayed put and visible and he had someone waiting for him that knew where he was and when he was due back. His wife knew exactly when and whom to call and what to say. I can't fault him for that excellent preparation.

I just think it sounded a bit too convenient based on the way the story was written (which may or may not be accurate). It was reported that his inability to locate his boat was all that necessitated the rescue and being able to return to your boat is a matter of personal responsibility. Sure anyone can get lost, but since he was going hunting alone in an isolated area, I would expect him to have and use a map and compass and probably also a GPS. It also wouldn't hurt to have other basic precautions such as being equipped and supplied to spend the night if necessary. If he had unforseeable mechanical problems or some act of God left him stranded there, that would be a whole different situation.

Given his predicament, he certainly did the right thing. I just don't understand how he got himself into that predicament. I would have had more of a plan for finding the boat than "I hope I wander back here later, but if not the CG is on the way."

As for the cost, it is not clear in the story what assets were mobilized or for how long. It certainly costs money to operate aircraft and water vessles just like it costs money to drive your car for an additional trip to the store. Only a whole lot more in the case of this expensive, complex and high-maintenance machinery. A typical search helicopter costs $1,200 per hour to operate. This says nothing of the risks to the search personnel which were compouned by having to operate after dark in this case.

Lurker,
All good points.
Thing is the article didn't give much info other than he wasn't home on time & the coast guard found him.

With that small amount of info in the story it could make the most prepared & responsible person sound like a total fool.

Generally speaking a
1.hunter
2.boating to an island
3.in Alaska
4.66 years old (according to the report)
probably has more sense than to be considered a TOTAL fool.

Alaska, hunting & boating (particularly combined) have a way of weeding total fools out of the gene pool before retirement age is reached, again generally speaking.


Theepdinker

I would think a very well driven luxIII running on 2D's, would be an excellent light in ths situation.

70 lumens would not be out of the question, as well as a very long runtime.

Bob

At least he had something better then a stock mini-mag.

Theepdinker

[ QUOTE ]
KevinL said:
It's a good ending to the story. Sensible too - to get his wife to stand by and ring in if he did not return by a specified time. It would suck to be sitting out there for a couple of days or even overnight especially without lunch (what, no lunch? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif)

I checked up on the PT 40, interesting little light, alkaline powered. "28 lumens" claimed - I usually derate that by half to get metrics comparable to Surefire lights. So he was saved by something with the power of an E1e. Awesome. I tried the MN01 the other day and it was a total washout.

Imagine what a lithium powered Space Needle/Lux3 could do.. there are times when insane throw DOES come in useful - imagine being able to signal aircraft overhead at 1000ft. With 330+ yards of throw and enough light to identify what I'm looking at, heh...

[/ QUOTE ]

I would not derate a tec 40..... it put out some nice light. 6volts into a 4.8 volt bulb. Someone here called it a poor man's e2e.

the best light is the one you have on you!

Ditto cy!! The guy's alive and that's what counts!!