SAR delayed "because they have a beacon"?!

Hi all, DISCLAIMER: I don't know the details of this incident, and if anyone should be able to supply details that explain this decision, I would be grateful. As I see it at the moment, this is NOT a rational or, for that matter, professional decision. Just found this incident report at softrock.co.nz: ---------- A tramping party of 3 male New Zealanders [...] became overdue on the 5/04/2010; APRES & Police were notified; it was decided to wait as they were well equipped and carrying an EPIRB [...] At around 1445hrs they activated their EPIRB. [...] One of the party had slipped and fallen - he received multiple fractures of the wrist, broken ribs and concussion. He was extracted to Greymouth Hospital [...] ---------- What the hell?! If I set an "overdue date and time" with friends and they report me or my group missing when I don't contact them back by then, I want SAR to begin then and there, and not play russian roulette with our lives and wait! Waiting in that scenario plain ignores two unlikely but possible scenarios: => no one in the group is able to activate the beacon => the beacon is malfunctioning or lost Both of the above are unlikely, but they can happen. And both of the above is exactly the reason why I set a date and time with a friend to report back from the trip - to cover exactly these two potential problems! So if anyone decides NOT to start SAR activities "because they have a beacon", despite friends clearly reporting us overdue as agreed beforehand, that's incredibly reckless and a very misguided use of technology, to say the least! It's punishing someone who has actually taken all possible safety measures - thanks a lot. If that would happen to me, some people would have to face some very tough questions afterwards. Very concerned about this. Any thoughts, anyone? Thanks, Matt