What's the Deal With Poor Pinkham Notch Cell Service? [Archive] - WhiteBlaze

Driver8

07-22-2011, 17:18

Major inconvenience in the fact that cell phone service at Pinkham Notch is so poor! I have Verizon and two of my hiking partners this week have AT&T. Our party of 6 had split into three groups, and we very much wanted to check in with Group 3 from the base, having finished our day's hikes, and we were unable to summon cell service at Pinkham. I'm floored that this vitally important and useful communication service, available at points along Boott Spur Trail (luckily I picked a good spot up there from which to make a call to one of the three parties), is NOT available at the home base.

Does anyone here know what the story is on this? One cell tower at the base carrying all four major service providers would seem to be an obvious move. Anyone want to pool money to make this happen?

bobqzzi

07-22-2011, 22:09

Just curious, how old are you? Please don;t take that amiss,or as some type of personal attack- it's not, I'm just really curious

Driver8

07-22-2011, 22:21

Just curious, how old are you? Please don;t take that amiss,or as some type of personal attack- it's not, I'm just really curious

Relevance?

Slo-go'en

07-22-2011, 22:31

Lone Wolf

07-23-2011, 05:48

Major inconvenience in the fact that cell phone service at Pinkham Notch is so poor!surely you're not serious

gumball

07-23-2011, 06:06

surely you're not serious

Lol, I almost posted a similar comment but decided to wait for this. :)

Oh, and ditto. Its hiking. The great outdoors. In the woods. Lack of modern conveniences like this is why many of us GO hiking...

Lone Wolf

07-23-2011, 06:10

i ain't got no cell phone so i don't get what the big deal is

Lone Wolf

07-23-2011, 06:24

i ain't got no cell phone so i don't get what the big deal isand i certainly wouldn't be "floored" if i had a phone but couldn't get service. funny stuff. should be in the humor section :)

Marta

07-23-2011, 06:46

Funny. It's not just kids who are getting impatient about not having constant access/control. My 80-year-old mother was complaining to me last week that her granddaughter had not instantly returned a phone call while on a trip to New Hampshire. Surely there was no place in NH without cell service, she said. I assured her that NH has that combination of mountains and sparse population that makes cell service the spottiest.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 07:19

and no wifi at the shelters? come on now.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 07:36

Cell service in this area is provided by towers on Pine mountain, which overlooks Gorham and services the general Berlin/Gorham area. Unfortunetly, the signal is blocked by Madison and Adams from getting into the notch. It is not economically feasable to provide service into Pinkham notch. Fact of life in a very mountainous and relatively sparcely populated area.

A serious, substantive reply. Thanks! :)

Who says it's not economically feasible to provide service into the Notch? It'a possible to put smaller repeater tramsitters in place atop existing structures, one at the busy, well-developed summit and one at Pinkham.

Of course it's mountain country, but it is also very heavily used, and such minor additions would be major aids to health and safety in a dangerous place. We, as a group, didn't expect crystal clear service in all spots on the mountainsides out there, but to ask for decent service in Pinkham doesn't seem like so much - not as costly or obstrusive as some might think - nor does it to have a small transmitter put in place on the summit grounds, given all the activity and structures up there.

Jeff

07-23-2011, 07:42

Wait until you hike thru Maine.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 07:48

It's different, Jeff, when it's expected. As I outlined in the post above yours, it needn't be hard or expensive to service the large traffic going through Pinkham and to the Mt. W summit and, in the process, much of the ground in between, so it's reasonable to expect, with all those people flowing through, somewhat decent cell service, especially at the two bases. The USFS uses an expensive walkie-talkie system - I walked with an employee who was using one the last 0.4 of my hike. Bet they could save a good chunk of change putting in cell transmitters at PN and at the summit and then piggy-backing off that for their communications.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 07:50

In short, it's not unreasonable to expect or to ask for cell service at Pinkham and the W summit. No one expects cell service in the Bigelows or the 100 Mile Wilderness. ...

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 07:55

ask the rescue folks about cell phones in the mountains. the problem is too many people become reliant on a cell phone to get them out of trouble that good planning and common sense would have kept them out of in the first place. they tend to take more chances,with a cell phone as a security blanket. the whites can be very unforgiving, and Mt Washington has a long deadly history. When you use a cell to call for rescue, you can be putting many other lives in danger.Yes, its an inconvenience, but thats all it is.

bobqzzi

07-23-2011, 07:55

Relevance?

I am interested in how a person's age affects their expectations about technology.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 08:05

When you use a cell to call for rescue, you can be putting many other lives in danger.

That's true regardless of the means of communication. If you send a person as a messenger, the same threat to the safety of the rescuers applies, and it will take longer for help to come than if you, or someone with you, could just call. You are of course correct that cell phones can be like security blankets for SOME hikers, but not for all, certainly not for smart, well-prepared ones. I and my partners three such, and we just wanted to check in with our other three partners from one base, at a time, as it happened, when they were at the other (the summit, awaiting the 5 pm shuttle).

I doubt you would suggest people shouldn't hike difficult and dangerous terrain such as the Presidentials at all on the contingency that they might require rescue. The "security blanket" effect you cite, in my opinion, is far outweighed by the massive increase in safety and convenience which would be afforded by a small cost to improve cell service in the area, as I've outlined. If you believe it would be a bad idea to put in two small transmitters as I suggest, I simply ask, are you hostile to cell phone service generally?

Driver8

07-23-2011, 08:08

I am interested in how a person's age affects their expectations about technology.

The youngest person in our party was 17 and the oldest around 70. We all hiked safe and smart and got back sound though tired and sore. And we all expected to be able to place and receive calls at such busy places as Pinkham Notch and the summit of Mt. Washington.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 08:17

Again, talk to the SAR guys, get their opinion.and its not the same as sending someone for help.lack of cell service is expected in the mtns.
its just an inconvenience.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 08:24

Again, talk to the SAR guys, get their opinion.and its not the same as sending someone for help.lack of cell service is expected in the mtns.
its just an inconvenience.

So you're saying it's a bad idea to put in two small transmitters as I've suggested? Are you hostile to cell phone service generally?

I bet if you talked to SAR guys and gals they'd also tell you of a person or two, well prepared and smart but unlucky, who was hurt by a falling rock or similar problem - not by stupidity or lack of planning - and who they were able to save due to immediate cell phone communication, whereas the rescued might've died with the delay due to having to send someone as a messenger. Bet there's lots of stories like that.

bobqzzi

07-23-2011, 08:37

The youngest person in our party was 17 and the oldest around 70. We all hiked safe and smart and got back sound though tired and sore. And we all expected to be able to place and receive calls at such busy places as Pinkham Notch and the summit of Mt. Washington.

Interesting. You didnt answer my question though- how old are you? Honestly, it certainly would be nice if there was service, but expecting it strikes me as very unreasonable. Of course, I am 50 and so remember when there was no cell phone coverage, and many years of spotty coverage.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 09:00

So you're saying it's a bad idea to put in two small transmitters as I've suggested? Are you hostile to cell phone service generally?

I bet if you talked to SAR guys and gals they'd also tell you of a person or two, well prepared and smart but unlucky, who was hurt by a falling rock or similar problem - not by stupidity or lack of planning - and who they were able to save due to immediate cell phone communication, whereas the rescued might've died with the delay due to having to send someone as a messenger. Bet there's lots of stories like that.Just talk to the SAR guys.I carry a cell phone myself, but I know I cant rely on it in the mountains. Im saying carrying a cell phone sometimes compensates for lack of preparation. Most SAR Ive spoken to will tell you theres nothing wrong with carrying a cell phone, just not to think it will get you out of trouble.Im sure if I were in trouble, Id appreciate being able to get cell service. but i wont expect to.

Slo-go'en

07-23-2011, 09:30

Who says it's not economically feasible to provide service into the Notch? It'a possible to put smaller repeater tramsitters in place atop existing structures, one at the busy, well-developed summit and one at Pinkham.

It's not nearly as simple as that. Bascially, a mini-cell site would have to be installed to service just the notch and that is a very expensive thing to do.

envman67

07-23-2011, 09:39

I would recommend bringing a shortwave radio transmitter...12927

kanga

07-23-2011, 09:39

are you seriously whining about not having phone signal on the trail?

envman67

07-23-2011, 09:39

Smoke signals work for me....http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=12927&d=1311428343&thumb=1

Driver8

07-23-2011, 09:41

Honestly, it certainly would be nice if there was service, but expecting it strikes me as very unreasonable.

Pinkham Notch mid-summer is a town, in effect, of 2000 people. Hikers, workers, overnighters. I'd bet a dollar or two there are few towns of that population in the U.S. without a decent cellular signal. Very few. In that light, do you stand by your statement that it's "very unreasonable" to expect decent cell service at Pinkham? I agree it would be very unreasonable to expect a signal in every nook and cranny of Tuckerman's Ravine or the Great Gulf, due to the vagaries of terrain. But no service at the mother ship or at the summit, which has plenty of doodads and gizmos?

With due respect, I think yours is the unreasonable position, given how cheap and easy is the fix I propose and how much convenience and safety enhancement would be afforded by them. We're not talking lightly traveled backcountry Maine here. We're talking two well-developed and highly-frequented places, Pinkham and the summit. This ain't Chinese arithmetic.

Speaking of arithmetic, my age is not yours to know. I've left more than enough data tracks on this site, however, that if you want to narrow it down, you can. Directly, publicly and repeatedly asking a stranger his or her age is, I'm sure, not a central Dale Carnegie tenet.

mudhead

07-23-2011, 09:52

Perhaps the locals don't care for it to become Hartford North.

Your expectation may be reasonable to some, or to others a reminder of Summer Tourist Season.

bobqzzi

07-23-2011, 09:56

Pinkham Notch mid-summer is a town, in effect, of 2000 people. Hikers, workers, overnighters. I'd bet a dollar or two there are few towns of that population in the U.S. without a decent cellular signal. Very few. In that light, do you stand by your statement that it's "very unreasonable" to expect decent cell service at Pinkham? I agree it would be very unreasonable to expect a signal in every nook and cranny of Tuckerman's Ravine or the Great Gulf, due to the vagaries of terrain. But no service at the mother ship or at the summit, which has plenty of doodads and gizmos?

With due respect, I think yours is the unreasonable position, given how cheap and easy is the fix I propose and how much convenience and safety enhancement would be afforded by them. We're not talking lightly traveled backcountry Maine here. We're talking two well-developed and highly-frequented places, Pinkham and the summit. This ain't Chinese arithmetic.

Speaking of arithmetic, my age is not yours to know. I've left more than enough data tracks on this site, however, that if you want to narrow it down, you can. Directly, publicly and repeatedly asking a stranger his or her age is, I'm sure, not a central Dale Carnegie tenet.

Yes, I stand by my statement. I think it is completely unreasonable for you to EXPECT there is cell phone service on the trail in those places. I also think that your statement that the fix is "easy and cheap" is inaccurate. People always think things are easy and cheap when they don't have to do the work or pay for it either. What would be the motivation for cell carriers to go to that expense? In what way would it improve their business?
As for the summit of Mt.Washington, last time I was there, there was a pay phone.
While I'm sure it would be much more convenient for those inclined to make cell phone use a part of their hiking experience, it's impact on safety is a double edged sword as others have pointed out.

How old are you again?

double d

07-23-2011, 09:59

I mean no dis-respect here Driver8, but if you want "service" go to a WalMart when you have a complaint about a product you bought from them, as one reason why hiking trails were created (and protected by state/federal law) is because most want to get away from cell phone reception (and the endless debate out its use and abuse). To me, complaining about cell phone reception on the great hiking trails of America is like a middle aged fat guy complaining to a 16 year old server that his big mac doesn't taste good!

double d

07-23-2011, 10:00

[QUOTE=bobqzzi;1183032]Yes, I stand by my statement. I think it is completely unreasonable for you to EXPECT there is cell phone service on the trail in those places. I also think that your statement that the fix is "easy and cheap" is inaccurate. People always think things are easy and cheap when they don't have to do the work or pay for it either. What would be the motivation for cell carriers to go to that expense? In what way would it improve their business?
As for the summit of Mt.Washington, last time I was there, there was a pay phone.
While I'm sure it would be much more convenient for those inclined to make cell phone use a part of their hiking experience, it's impact on safety is a double edged sword as others have pointed out.
***Great perception (in my opinion) about this issue of cell phones on the trail.

weary

07-23-2011, 10:12

A serious, substantive reply. Thanks! :)

Who says it's not economically feasible to provide service into the Notch? It'a possible to put smaller repeater tramsitters in place atop existing structures, one at the busy, well-developed summit and one at Pinkham.

Of course it's mountain country, but it is also very heavily used, and such minor additions would be major aids to health and safety in a dangerous place. We, as a group, didn't expect crystal clear service in all spots on the mountainsides out there, but to ask for decent service in Pinkham doesn't seem like so much - not as costly or obstrusive as some might think - nor does it to have a small transmitter put in place on the summit grounds, given all the activity and structures up there.
It wasn't more than 5 years ago, that I was arguing that the proliferation of cell phone use was destroying the sense of wildness that some of us seek by walking the hills and forests. I was told I was paranoid, that no one ever used a cell phone in front of others. It was just a safety device buried deep in their packs.

For what it's worth. I oppose any extension of cell phone use, regardless of how cheap it might be.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 10:15

It's not nearly as simple as that. Bascially, a mini-cell site would have to be installed to service just the notch and that is a very expensive thing to do.

Can you quantify, to a reasonable approximation, Slo-go'en, "very expensive"?

Driver8

07-23-2011, 10:18

are you seriously whining about not having phone signal on the trail?

If you read my posts you'll see that I did have signal on trail - I lucked out and attempted calls from a good spot - and that my complaint is that there is no signal at Pinkham Notch, a well-developed and very busy place.

AaronMB

07-23-2011, 10:18

A few thoughts...
The business of America is business - if it's not cost effective and profitable it's not going to happen. Especially in a small town.
Money is tight all around, for the little guy and the Man. The economy is down and a small town in the mountains isn't going to be on the top of the list of investments if the money isn't there.
Rangers/SAR relying on cell service to coordinate their activities would be silly, considering the nature of the beast. There's a reason they're using those radios.
The small town of 2k has either embraced the limited service or has compensated for the lack of it.
It's unfortunate that you assumed you would have service and became frustrated/concerned when you couldn't reach the other members of your party after you separated; obviously, it's too bad that you guys didn't know that beforehand, as you all could have planned appropriately.

bobqzzi

07-23-2011, 10:21

at Pinkham Notch, a well-developed and very busy place. Pinkham Notch is not well developed.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 10:22

People always think things are easy and cheap when they don't have to do the work or pay for it either. What would be the motivation for cell carriers to go to that expense?

I'm interested enough to investigate the latter question, Bob. I pay my cell phone bills, so it's not as though I'm some free rider, which is not constructive, imo.

How old are you again?

I have addressed that question. You are now being rude, confrontational and borderline abusive. I don't care for that and ask you kindly to desist.

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 10:24

pinkham notch is not a town and isnt really even close to any towns. youre basically complaining about lack of cell service at a hotel in the woods. isnt it also privte property? maybe the NFS and or AMC doesnt want transmitters or whatever installed there, cant say i blame them. the fact you got service up the mountain is just an accident that worked in your favor. why are you placing calls in the middle of a hike anyway? were you experiencing an emergency? if you were calling to tell someone how awesome it was that you were out hiking then this is exactly why having cell phone service in places like this is an annoyance.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 11:00

Money is tight all around, for the little guy and the Man.

The Man is doing quite well, thanks. Just read Forbes and Fortune's rich people lists. Not hurting.

The small town of 2k has either embraced the limited service or has compensated for the lack of it.

Pinkham Notch is not a town per se. It's, for the purposes of this conversation, the base of operations for the AMC and the US Forest Service for the Presidential Range. In mid-summer, at peak activity, it has a large number of employees working there and a couple thousand hikers and is fronted by a broad-shouldered, well-improved, heavily traveled state highway. It's not as though the village citizens have decided to keep out cell towers.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 11:08

why are you placing calls in the middle of a hike anyway? were you experiencing an emergency? if you were calling to tell someone how awesome it was that you were out hiking then this is exactly why having cell phone service in places like this is an annoyance.

Why aren't you reading posts to which you reply with pointed questions answered in those original posts? That, too, is an annoyance. Give a thorough read to the OP and get back to me - I think you'll approve of my cell phone usage in this instance - and try not to hector people without first doing the most minimal homework, if you kindly could, thanks.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 11:12

It wasn't more than 5 years ago, that I was arguing that the proliferation of cell phone use was destroying the sense of wildness that some of us seek by walking the hills and forests. I was told I was paranoid, that no one ever used a cell phone in front of others. It was just a safety device buried deep in their packs.

For what it's worth. I oppose any extension of cell phone use, regardless of how cheap it might be.

Now here is a forthright reply. Much appreciated, weary. Though you and I disagree on this, I very much appreciate your candor and courtesy. I understand cell phones on trail are an issue which get people hot under the collar, and I share many of those concerns. I like it very much when people discuss such a hot topic in the reasonable, straightforward, honest and respectful way you have. Not everyone has such good grace. :)

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 11:27

Why aren't you reading posts to which you reply with pointed questions answered in those original posts? That, too, is an annoyance. Give a thorough read to the OP and get back to me - I think you'll approve of my cell phone usage in this instance - and try not to hector people without first doing the most minimal homework, if you kindly could, thanks.

point taken about reading, however, i almost never approve of cell phone usage : ) at the risk of getting sidetracked this too is why cell phones are a detriment. theyve instill in most people this bothersome need to keep checking in and be in constant contact. all 3 of your parties i'm sure were just fine. you didnt need to call them, but being used to the constant ability to do so has made you go all wiggy when you can not.

any device that instills this sort of insecurity in people is not worth having in my book.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 11:53

all 3 of your parties i'm sure were just fine. you didnt need to call them, but being used to the constant ability to do so has made you go all wiggy when you can not.

You're within your rights to pass judgment as you choose and to be annoyed at what you will. Just know that I had to turn back just over halfway up, so the other parties wanted to make sure I was OK and specifically asked me to check in, so I did. There was no one within a quarter mile at the time on Boott Spur on a Tuesday, so only the insects, frogs and birds would have been momentarily disturbed. You can quickly infer, with application of common sense, why it would be very useful for me to know when my partners were returning - dinner plans, etc. Also, a couple members of the "other three" I mention were around 70. Concern for their well-being and curiosity about their progress, given that one of them expressed a lot of doubt about the difficulty of the effort, was well within reason.

If you think cell phones are a detriment, that is your right, which I respect. I hope you respect that I and the great lion's share of people disagree with you. I won't, however, hector you or judge you harshly on that basis. ;)

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 12:06

well then you will kindly respect AMC's and or NFS's decision to not worry about having cell service at pinkham notch and stop acting like you have a right to it.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 12:13

well then you will kindly respect AMC's and or NFS's decision to not worry about having cell service at pinkham notch and stop acting like you have a right to it.

You assume facts not in evidence. You don't know, nor do I, AMC's decision or lack thereof in the matter, or USFS's for that matter. I'm curious enough to investigate further than the shooting gallery this thread has become and am doing so. If I find anything interesting and relevant, and if I feel like it, I'll report it.

I have every right to respectfully register my concerns about this issue here, and I appreciate courteous responses. I don't expect them, however - would be unreasonable. :)

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 12:25

driver8. the problem many are having here is entitlement issues.and every year there are a few stories about pepole who use their cell phones to call for help,and put many people in danger when they simply used poor judgement.when its too easy, people get sloppy and rely totally on a tool that may fail when they need it most..and many go to the woods to get away from all the nonsense.I and many others do NOT want to perpetuate cell phone use in the wild.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 12:34

driver8. the problem many are having here is entitlement issues.

I think the problem here, hikerboy, is that many of the respondents here both are hostile to extension of cell phone service into the mountains, without exception, and take it personally, donning an attacking attitude toward those who disagree. I appreciate those, such as weary and yourself, who disagree with me, even intensely, and yet express their disagreement civilly. I'd love to see that more common in our country today. :)

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 12:46

I'd love to see that more common in our country today.
rudeness is also an entitlement issue today. But I think part of it stems from anger over rescues that didnt need to be made which put other lives at risk.
Someone once told me never to argue with an idiot, its hard to tell the difference.so try not to get too defensive. I undertand you're point, but the consensus here is its not a good idea, one i agree with.

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 12:59

You assume facts not in evidence. You don't know, nor do I, AMC's decision or lack thereof in the matter, or USFS's for that matter. I'm curious enough to investigate further than the shooting gallery this thread has become and am doing so. If I find anything interesting and relevant, and if I feel like it, I'll report it.

I have every right to respectfully register my concerns about this issue here, and I appreciate courteous responses. I don't expect them, however - would be unreasonable. :)

youre correct, technically. i have assumed that this is a conscious decision and not just a case of "oops, we never thought to put cell coverage in pinkham notch."

it may be financially motivated, it may be a wildnerness purity thing, but what it is not, i am fairly comfortable assuiming, is accidental. i guess my point is that whether its AMC or the USFS or the cell phone carriers, its their business. its the expectation that their should be cell service just because youd like their to be that i find offensive. its simply not your place (nor mine, i dont go around telling anyone to NOT have a cell phone or service).

Driver8

07-23-2011, 13:03

But I think part of it stems from anger over rescues that didnt need to be made which put other lives at risk.

Many avid hikers enjoy the wilderness as an escape from other people. My motivation, also shared by many, is more one of enjoying the beauty of the outdoors, as well as the exercise and the challenge. The former group hate cell phones because it is more social than is comfortable for them, means more people on trail and the like, and the idea of cell phone service, and thus usage, being further extended into the wilderness is, to them, an obscenity, full stop.

I think the security blanket issue you raise is legitimate, but I think the desire for solitude, for isolation from civilization is the bigger one for most here.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 13:21

i guess my point is that whether its AMC or the USFS or the cell phone carriers, its their business. its the expectation that their should be cell service just because youd like their to be that i find offensive. its simply not your place (nor mine, i dont go around telling anyone to NOT have a cell phone or service).

The USFS is a government agency, and I am a taxpayer. Also, I recently hiked out there. Their functioning is my business every bit as much as it is yours to come and disagree with my opinion. For instance, the young man who works for the USFS who walked with me the final 0.4 back down to Pinkham told me all about the repairs and improvements under way to the Tuckerman Ravine Trail - his courtesy and forthcoming were not just good manners, he understands that I not only am a constituent as a taxpayer, I am a user and therefore especially interested. If I had known about the lack of cell service while walking with him (I discovered it shortly after we parted ways), I'm sure, as smart and well-informed as he is, that he would have happily fielded my questions about the topic, too.

The AMC, meanwhile, is under contract to the USFS, which owns most of the land out there. AMC is a private membership organization, true, but its contractual relationship with the government, here, is of interest to you and to me and to all taxpayers. Very much our place to ask questions.

You attribute to me thinking, again, not in evidence and, more to the point, not in my head. I have not set forth some whimsical, "By golly, I want this thing (cell service) and dammit I expect it therefore to happen!" That's petulant foolishness - you are, to be direct about it, intemperate and irrational to attribute that mindset to me when it's neither there nor in evidence.

What is there is my strongly held and stated view which disagrees with yours. If you cannot respect me in that and extend the common courtesy not to misread or over-read my motives, well, I can't help you with that problem. But I can and will correct the record when you misstate or mischaracterize what I say or intend.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 13:23

Anyone want to pool money to make this happen?

I notice that nobody had the courtesy to respond to your question. Mark me down as a no vote. I agree that there are lots of major inconveniences to be found that could have safety consequences. Right now I would vote for aid stations with ice water and an air conditioned lounge every 8 to ten miles. Shouldn't be that expensive since it would really only be needed in some states, and for a relatively narrow window of time.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 13:35

I notice that nobody had the courtesy to respond to your question. Mark me down as a no vote. I agree that there are lots of major inconveniences to be found that could have safety consequences. Right now I would vote for aid stations with ice water and an air conditioned lounge every 8 to ten miles. Shouldn't be that expensive since it would really only be needed in some states, and for a relatively narrow window of time.

Thanks for your response, nuf. That was more of a one-off jest. :)

nothermark

07-23-2011, 14:17

A serious, substantive reply. Thanks! :)

Who says it's not economically feasible to provide service into the Notch? It'a possible to put smaller repeater tramsitters in place atop existing structures, one at the busy, well-developed summit and one at Pinkham.

Of course it's mountain country, but it is also very heavily used, and such minor additions would be major aids to health and safety in a dangerous place. We, as a group, didn't expect crystal clear service in all spots on the mountainsides out there, but to ask for decent service in Pinkham doesn't seem like so much - not as costly or obstrusive as some might think - nor does it to have a small transmitter put in place on the summit grounds, given all the activity and structures up there.

Can you guarantee several thousand calls per day 365 days a year? Do that and the phone company might be interested.

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 14:31

AaronMB

07-23-2011, 14:32

You assume facts not in evidence.

...The former group hate cell phones because it is more social than is comfortable for them, means more people on trail and the like, and the idea of cell phone service, and thus usage, being further extended into the wilderness is, to them, an obscenity, full stop...

I--that former group--would rather not see cell phone use on the trails because, as suggested, it can perpetuate the security blanket issue. With all respect, your situation is an appropriate example (especially considering there were three in your party that "were around 70" whose "well being" raised your concern). You may have verbally made a Plan B, just in case cellular service was unavailable, but you did not state that here.
So, in my perspective, the issue is: why plan something, along with an appropriate contingency plan, when one can simply use the phone? It's fortunate, in this case, that those persons in your party that had your concern were OK.
If you had known that there would not be cellular coverage, would you still have decided to split up and not discuss a back-up plan (assuming you did not)?

People, in general, are social creatures and as we become accustomed to that e-device in our pockets, we want to take it with us. That's fine. Hike Your Own Hike. But when that device becomes a replacement for planning (be it research regarding the next resupply town, or the verbal Plan B that is made when the group splits up and decides to meet at a specified location at or around a specified time, along with a Plan C if Plan B doesn't happen), that device can become a hazard for more than just the unprepared user. That, for me, is the issue.

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 14:33

The USFS is a government agency, and I am a taxpayer.

the mission of the USFS is far more involved than making hikers happy. by all means though, take it up with them. organizing a half baked rally to try and "fix" it for them though...?

notice how much enthusiastic support youve gotten.

Silverstone

07-23-2011, 15:07

Oh man... You had to turn back because you couldn't get in touch with another section of your group?

Serious bummer, man. But that right there is the problem, see, if y'all would've stuck together, this wouldn't have been an issue. I mean, Lewis and Clark, like, almost *never* separated on their expedition out west, and cell phone coverage wasn't an issue for them.

Oh, and remember, when the Brady Bunch went to the amusement park and they lost Mr. Brady's plans? No cell coverage there either, which led to all kinds of shenanigans and mix-ups, so I kinda see your point.

Sorry for coming off so snarky, but re-reading the OP, I just can't help but face-palm at the sense of entitlement that oozes from it.

Again, sorry that I have nothing to offer but a dumbfounded ***? look on my face.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 15:11

lewis and clark did separate for several weeks during their expedition, and found each other without the use of cell phones.

restless

07-23-2011, 15:42

Before I comment on this issue, a few background notes. First of all, I used to work for AMC and was based out of Pinkham Notch, and am also a Verizon customer, so I am well aware of the lack of cell phone service and the inconvienance it causes for the employees. Second, I work for the NPS and have seen first hand the problem of readily accessible cell phone service in a wilderness environment. People use cell phones to get them out of situations brought on by their lack of stupidity. Our LEO's here are kept busy during the summer months responding to calls from people who are not prepared for wilderness conditions.
I echo the sentiments of a majority of people on this issue and would rather not see cell service in the Notch. I believe it destroys the wilderness values that we seek to achieve by going into the woods. I have been behind people carrying on a rather loud and long conversation on a phone while going up a trail; she did have a phone, she did not carry any water. Not everyone who hikes shares the same wilderness values that a majority of people here do. As to the affordability of it, I doubt that the USFS would put one in, given the current budget situation. The USFS, like the NPS, faces a large backlog of projects due to a shrinking budget and services and facilities are being reduced and/or closed in an effort to save money. So I am fairly sure that providing cell phone service to this area is not a high priority. So that leaves AMC. Given the attitude that I have seen in AMC members, who sense of entitlement runs deeper than any hiker I have come across, I am surprised that AMC has not provided this service. They have the money although, like other non-profits, they are seeing a drop in income as well. If this is such a passionate issue to you, rather than becoming defensive over peoples lack of enthusiasm with the subject, perhaps you could finance the installation of this service. There are people who would be grateful, with perhaps the exception of those who have to go out because Aunt Edna just ran out of water and was getting hot. (That is not an exaggeration, I know of a rescue involving 8 Park personnel over that very reason. Cost to the person we had to go take water to and walk out -$0.00. Cost to the taxpayer-about $3000 in manpower.)
I hope I have not come across as offensive. If I have, get a grip on reality. If you want cell phone service wherever you go, stay out of the woods.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 16:02

I hope I have not come across as offensive.

Up to the following-quoted passage, a very informative and useful response. Thanks. I can't personally finance a cell tower for Pinkham, chuckle, but it's an interesting subject, that's for sure.

If you want cell phone service wherever you go ...

Did you read my posts? I made clear that's not where I'm coming from. If you're just looking for an easy, convenient, piling-on taunt, yea for you, you found one! :banana If you're looking to sincerely and constructively address me as I am and as I've stated myself, that last bit would be a failure. :(

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 16:04

There are people who would be grateful, with perhaps the exception of those who have to go out because Aunt Edna just ran out of water and was getting hot. (That is not an exaggeration, I know of a rescue involving 8 Park personnel over that very reason. Cost to the person we had to go take water to and walk out -$0.00. Cost to the taxpayer-about $3000 in manpower.)

off topic and by no means in defense of aunt edna, but did it really take 8 people to bring water to an uninjured hiker? it seems from stories like this that there is often a knee jerk reaction to treat every "emergency" call like its actually an emergency. perhaps a common sense adjustment and analysis of each call rather than running out all guns blazing every time anyone ever calls about anything is in order given the realities of the situation. i think both aunt edna and whoever thought sending 8 people out was a good idea both conspried to waste the taxpayer's money.

on the other hand if i ran things my answer would have been tough luck, cant help you.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 16:06

Can you guarantee several thousand calls per day 365 days a year? Do that and the phone company might be interested.

I'm sure it wouldn't be 365 x several thousand. It would doubtless be a lot more in the summer and fewer in the winter. With passing traffic on Rt. 16, it would probably be over 1000 calls a day in the summer.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 16:15

You guys need to stop this and go out and hike. Im here at work, so I cant. but stop the bickering already. driver8-most of the people whove respsonded have many years experience hiking the whites.Its the toughest terrain in the east, and its dangerous for the unprepared.But you seem to insist on arguing a point that is just misguided.there is NO NEED for cell phone service in the woods.try using sigbnal flags or something to stay in touch, or cans with string.yodelling.whistles.

Silverstone

07-23-2011, 16:17

lewis and clark did separate for several weeks during their expedition, and found each other without the use of cell phones.

I'll take "Missing the Point" for a thousand, Alex! :rolleyes:

I know this, as a six-year history major at a number of fine institutions of higher learning, I just didn't expect others to know this, too. I just had to come up with something quickly, some famous wilderness example, to make my snarky remark, before the boss came over (I was using a computer at work, and normally just lurk without logging on when I'm there). So that was my quick, off-the-cuff response.

But you win the internet today!

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 16:23

lewis and Clarks journals were one of the greatest pieces of historical literature Ive ever read. sorry for the brief hijack, now back to the bickering.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 16:32

I--that former group--would rather not see cell phone use on the trails because, as suggested, it can perpetuate the security blanket issue.

You know your motivation but not that of everyone else here who has responded negatively to my post. One or two clearly have stated the security blanket concern, others have expressed a general hostility to cell phones in whatever place, there's a non-surprising scatter of views.

With all respect, your situation is an appropriate example (especially considering there were three in your party that "were around 70" whose "well being" raised your concern). You may have verbally made a Plan B, just in case cellular service was unavailable, but you did not state that here.
So, in my perspective, the issue is: why plan something, along with an appropriate contingency plan, when one can simply use the phone? It's fortunate, in this case, that those persons in your party that had your concern were OK.
If you had known that there would not be cellular coverage, would you still have decided to split up and not discuss a back-up plan (assuming you did not)?

... when that device becomes a replacement for planning ... that device can become a hazard for more than just the unprepared user. That, for me, is the issue.

As it turned out, in fact, the lucky cell reception I found when I deployed the phone on the way down afforded me contact with our lead party. Reassured and informed them and me - they'd gone well ahead and didn't know I'd turned around and didn't know their progress or whereabouts. They got back to Pinkham about an hour after me, and I knew when to expect them, thanks to the call going through. I also knew their route of descent - Lion Head and, as a result, knew where to send for help in case they didn't make it back.

We made extensive plans but simply did not know about the lack of cell service at Pinkham until three of us got back to base. The other three made it up fine, but two of them were pretty well exhausted. They took, as I noted above, the 5 pm shuttle and, fortunately, got back before the other three of us had a whole lot of time to worry, though we were frustrated at the inability to call them. It all worked out - for me b/c I have hiked a lot and knew my limits and my resources (how much water and gatorade and food) and how much of a hike was ahead of me, from a very detailed reading of the White Mountain Guide and its maps as well as the 4000 Footers of the White Mountains book before departing on the hike. I also benefited from the helpful advice of many here when I posted a thread about my upcoming hike and all aspects of planning for it.

In our case, the little bit of cell service we luckily had was very helpful. Being trail smart and well-prepared was even moreso. I believe people will make foolish decisions on hiking up Mt. Washington whether or not they have cell phones, though I do agree the security blanket effect of the technology is real. So common is cell service, I'd now that a lot of people hike out there with the security blanket effect in place - thinking the cell will work if needed - and without the reality. That being the case, some signs posted at trailheads and at the visitor's center about this would be a smart idea.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 16:37

Mods, please show some mercy and close this.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 16:41

I never thought I would make the above post.

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 16:42

Mods, please show some mercy and close this.
it wont help, theyll all go to the AMC huts thread, that is so closely related its scary, and apparently open to just as much debate. In my mind theres no debate, be prepared, dont count on cell service, dont count on the huts taking you in if you're not a paying customer.

tdoczi

07-23-2011, 16:48

"i planned ahead well, i just planned on using my cell phone and couldnt. yeah, i know, SOME people dont plan well (not me) and rely on cells as a safety net. yeah, not a good idea at all, but that wasnt what **I** was doing. whew, it sure was a good thing it did work the little bit it did though or else i really might have had to sit and wait in uncertainty for an hour or two. everything would have been blown to hell!

as further proof of my excellent planning, i turned back when i knew that with the amount of resources i had left and how hard the trail in front of me was i wouldnt make it all the way. i really really read alot of info from several books and knew exactly what i was getting into, but then decided to carry less than i eneded to complete a trail i knew exactly how hard it was."

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 16:54

its called backpacking. amazing that man did without these things for thousands of years, Now noone can live without being in touch 24/7/365
theres something to be said in becoming self reliant.
Ive had to pull myself out of numerous situations where I had gotten in a little over my head, but those moments of self reliance were always extremely satisfying that I had developed the skill set to deal with emergencies.Those times have made me a much stronger , more confidant hiker.as ive said before, its the epics that are much more meorable than those hikes that went without incident.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 17:11

hikerboy57

07-23-2011, 17:20

You just need to get real. Personal responsibility is a thing of the past.Take that back or I'll sue!!!:banana

john gault

07-23-2011, 17:28

This post has raised a question in my mind, maybe someone can answer.

Is there any section of the trail in which cell service was installed to cover -- i.e. specifically for the trail? I suspect the answer is no, meaning all the cell service from the trail is simply luck.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 17:32

weary

07-23-2011, 17:34

Mods, please show some mercy and close this.
Censorship is not proper, just because you lack the willpower to stop opening a thread you are bored with.

kanga

07-23-2011, 17:43

If you read my posts you'll see that I did have signal on trail - I lucked out and attempted calls from a good spot - and that my complaint is that there is no signal at Pinkham Notch, a well-developed and very busy place.

okay. let me rephrase. are you seriously whining about not having phone signal at pinkham notch?

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 17:50

Censorship is not proper, just because you lack the willpower to stop opening a thread you are bored with.

Hey, Weary and I agree on something!!! Just was starting to feel bad for the OP.

double d

07-23-2011, 17:55

Pinkham Notch is not well developed.

I think mother nature would disagree with you!

John B

07-23-2011, 18:05

okay. let me rephrase. are you seriously whining about not having phone signal at pinkham notch?

Yup! It was a huge inconvenience. After hours of relentless hiking, they needed to check in with "Group 3," which probably is code for mommy.

Just kidding, Driver! You da Man and are voicing a legit concern.

bobqzzi

07-23-2011, 18:30

I'm sure it wouldn't be 365 x several thousand. It would doubtless be a lot more in the summer and fewer in the winter. With passing traffic on Rt. 16, it would probably be over 1000 calls a day in the summer.

I don't think call volume is really the issue. I think it is matter of whether they will garner more subscribers. There may well be some people who would choose a provider because it has service in the notch, but I think there would be very few.

I have no objection to cell service in those places, I was simply surprised you would expect it there. I disagree with your reasons for expecting it

If you can convince a cell provider to build a cell tower there becausse it is a profitable thing to do, then more power to you.

I don't want to put thoughts in your mind, so consider the following an objection to something theoretical.

It would be wrong to try to convince a cell phone company, the AMC, or the NFS to install a tower by arguing that one is required for safety reasons. This is the type of thinking that quicky leads to lawsuits claiming that the company/AMC/NFS have a legal obligation to provide such service. It also drives up the price of service to all users of the product.

Before you scoff: http://www.twackle.com/articles/Family806-Of-Lorenzen-Wright-Suing-Police---NBA--

Silverstone

07-23-2011, 18:30

If there were cell phone coverage everywhere, maybe that dude in 127 Hours wouldn't have had to cut off his own arm.

So yeah, if you're stuck under a boulder at Pinkham Notch, I could totally see how having cell coverage there would be a necessity...

weary

07-23-2011, 18:49

If there were cell phone coverage everywhere, maybe that dude in 127 Hours wouldn't have had to cut off his own arm.
A few of us at least still hike to experience a bit of wildness. That involves a willingness to accept some danger and hardships. Remove danger, and you lose wildness. Trails then become just an athletic event. a way to test ourselves -- something like going to a gym, with pictures of trees and wildlife on the walls.

nufsaid

07-23-2011, 18:55

A few of us at least still hike to experience a bit of wildness. That involves a willingness to accept some danger and hardships. Remove danger, and you lose wildness. Trails then become just an athletic event. a way to test ourselves -- something like going to a gym, with pictures of trees and wildlife on the walls.

I agree. But it seems some expect the government to be responsible for all their needs and thus remove them from responsibility. Is it possible we actually agree on two things?

Driver8

07-23-2011, 19:15

i really really read alot of info from several books and knew exactly what i was getting into, but then decided to carry less than i eneded to complete a trail i knew exactly how hard it was."

LOL. I didn't know if I could make it, but I tried. It wasn't about resources, it was about stamina and leg strength. I believe many here will agree, whatever they think about cell phones, that until one sees the Whites, having hiked southern New England exclusively, one cannot truly know what they're getting themselves into. I had a pretty strong sense before I went up to NH I probably couldn't make it to the top, the stronger upon actually eyeballing the Presidentials. That's some big hunks of mountain!

But was I not gonna try? Like hell I wasn't! I gave it my best shot and, true to the planning and responsibility ethic promoted by others here, I turned around rather than becoming an expensive rescue statistic. Yea for me - I'm AWESOME. :banana

Meanwhile, you, terducken, can HYOH and FYOS. :)

Skidsteer

07-23-2011, 19:22

Does anyone here know what the story is on this? One cell tower at the base carrying all four major service providers would seem to be an obvious move.

The story is that when it becomes profitable enough it will happen. It's quite likely the site acquisition teams are unable to find anyone willing or able to lease or sell the land for what they are willing to pay.

Such is life.

Lone Wolf

07-23-2011, 21:05

wow. such a non-issue. today's needy walkers and their electronic gadgets. how pathetic. the OP needs to stay home it seems. pinkham owes nobody nothin'

peakbagger

07-23-2011, 21:47

Skidsteer

07-23-2011, 22:07

Installing cell service at Pinkham or at Wildcat would not be as easy as some folks think. Both locations are USFS land which are leased by the entitities under a special use license which is renewed rarely. Unless the permit allows cell towers or equipment specifically, the entities would have to reopen the permit. Considering the last time AMC went for a permit renewal, they could have lost the Huts system, I expect they really wouldnt want to do it until the permit is up. Same with Wildcat. Of course Great Glen does own the land a the base of Mt Washington so they could install cell towers, but I expect that really wouldnt help Pinkham due to the lack of line of site. Great Glwn also has a good view of Pine Mtn so their service is probably not bad.

Exactly.

Some people seem to think that cell providers can wave a magic wand and erect a tower wherever they choose. Not so. The vast majority of cell sites are 20 year leases from private landowners that are under absolutely no obligation to lease their property. Leasing land from a public entity is much, much rarer and much more difficult for the providers. It happens, but it's a PITA for them in general.

Driver8

07-23-2011, 22:41

Some people seem to think that cell providers can wave a magic wand and erect a tower wherever they choose. Not so. ...

A decade ago I worked for a Sprint PCS contractor and got some acquaintance with cell towers and siting, for the record. "Some people" may have delusions of magic wands - I'm not among them.

singing wind

07-23-2011, 23:11

imho, far too much expected and wanted from a humble, simple trail...

restless

07-23-2011, 23:48

off topic and by no means in defense of aunt edna, but did it really take 8 people to bring water to an uninjured hiker? it seems from stories like this that there is often a knee jerk reaction to treat every "emergency" call like its actually an emergency. perhaps a common sense adjustment and analysis of each call rather than running out all guns blazing every time anyone ever calls about anything is in order given the realities of the situation. i think both aunt edna and whoever thought sending 8 people out was a good idea both conspried to waste the taxpayer's money.

on the other hand if i ran things my answer would have been tough luck, cant help you.

In this particular incident, a older gentleman had hiked down a rather short, but steep trail to a waterfall. He carried his camera outfit with him, but didnt have room to take any water. On his way back up, he began to get hot and was probably in the early throes of dehydration. The rescuers are not always able to assess a persons condition based on a cell phone call. If a carry out had been necessary, than all 8 would have in fact been needed, and probably a few more. The rescuers had to take water to him, get him rehydrated and then he was able to walk out. Of course they had to carry his pack and camera. The advent of cell phones has removed common sense from todays wilderness visitors. Knowing that they have an "out", people are more inclined to take risks beyond their capacity and ability. Cell phones do come in handy in certain situations but they should not be a replacement for common sense and preparedness.

Driver8

07-24-2011, 00:08

Installing cell service at Pinkham or at Wildcat would not be as easy as some folks think. Both locations are USFS land which are leased by the entitities under a special use license which is renewed rarely. Unless the permit allows cell towers or equipment specifically, the entities would have to reopen the permit. Considering the last time AMC went for a permit renewal, they could have lost the Huts system, I expect they really wouldnt want to do it until the permit is up. Same with Wildcat. Of course Great Glen does own the land a the base of Mt Washington so they could install cell towers, but I expect that really wouldnt help Pinkham due to the lack of line of site. Great Glwn also has a good view of Pine Mtn so their service is probably not bad.

Now this is useful information. Thank you, peakbagger. I imagine if the right political players got involved, this could get somewhere. To me, a non-Luddite, it's remarkable that so busy and important a place as Pinkham is w/o cell service which, as I've stated, would be a significant convenience and added safety service if installed. I expect you're probably right that approval would involve what might be a tricky USFS process, and that by itself is daunting for AMC.

tdoczi

07-24-2011, 03:27

until one sees the Whites, having hiked southern New England exclusively, one cannot truly know what they're getting themselves into. I had a pretty strong sense before I went up to NH I probably couldn't make it to the top, the stronger upon actually eyeballing the Presidentials. That's some big hunks of mountain!

smartest thing youve said all day, but, you missed my point, which was that your "plan" was nothing more than a series of ways to avoid proper planning. i give you credit for at least bailing at presumably the right time. although i find the key, for me anyway. to being able to tackle something like the whites is realizing you can do more than you think you can. some might call how much i sometimes push myself a bad idea, it hasnt hurt me yet though. these boards sometimes get full of posts from people saying "you cant do this" and "you cant do that" except i know you can because i have. and theres certainly plenty of people who can do way more than i can. its mostly mental willingness.

Driver8

07-24-2011, 10:25

smartest thing youve said all day, but, you missed my point, which was that your "plan" was nothing more than a series of ways to avoid proper planning. i give you credit for at least bailing at presumably the right time. although i find the key, for me anyway. to being able to tackle something like the whites is realizing you can do more than you think you can. some might call how much i sometimes push myself a bad idea, it hasnt hurt me yet though. these boards sometimes get full of posts from people saying "you cant do this" and "you cant do that" except i know you can because i have. and theres certainly plenty of people who can do way more than i can. its mostly mental willingness.

You have boundary issues. The best judge of one's own limits, provided one has one's faculties, is oneself. I made the call. I look back on it as not borderline. I probably could've gotten up to Boott Spur, but beyond that, under the circumstances, is a stretch. You need to learn to respect others, especially those who disagree with you. Good luck with that. Until then, FYOS.

tdoczi

07-24-2011, 11:02

You have boundary issues. The best judge of one's own limits, provided one has one's faculties, is oneself. I made the call. I look back on it as not borderline. I probably could've gotten up to Boott Spur, but beyond that, under the circumstances, is a stretch. You need to learn to respect others, especially those who disagree with you. Good luck with that. Until then, FYOS.

sorry, meant no disrespect and as i said you probably made the right call. but at the same time i'm also convinced that barring a physical injury, an average fit adult person can ascend mount washington in good weather carrying nothing but 20 ozs of water and a salty snack. we make these things more difficult than they are sometimes. i'm not saying thats what you did here, but we all, myself included, do this on occassion.

kanga

07-24-2011, 16:47

You have boundary issues. The best judge of one's own limits, provided one has one's faculties, is oneself. I made the call. I look back on it as not borderline. I probably could've gotten up to Boott Spur, but beyond that, under the circumstances, is a stretch. You need to learn to respect others, especially those who disagree with you. Good luck with that. Until then, FYOS.

that sounds dirty. if that's the case, you should probably FYOS. in the meantime, here is a trail, with cell service, that you can probably handle:

http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/recreation/wilderness-back-trail-adventure/

now quit whining. if you're going to go in the woods, you should expect NO cell service. carry on.

Toolshed

07-24-2011, 17:07

Relevance?
I beleive that the relevance was simply that instead of sounding like a 45 YO who has grown up without much of this technology and would seemingly embrace the lack of technology in the mountains, you came off sounding more like an abrasive (or petulant) 17YO whining about not being able to pick up a signal on their Droid.
That pretty much should be about it.:datz

Slo-go'en

07-24-2011, 17:16

To me, a non-Luddite, it's remarkable that so busy and important a place as Pinkham is w/o cell service which, as I've stated, would be a significant convenience and added safety service if installed.

Well, it is unfortunate that Pinkham is in a dead spot, but if you go down the road a little bit, (say to to Wildcat parking lot), I belive you would gain a signal, as you will if you gain some altitude, as you proved while up higher on the trail. I don't know what it would cost to fill in the Pinkham dead spot, but I imagine it would be a significent chuck of change and very unlikely to happen.

Heck, I know a lot of hikers couldn't make a call in Damascus because they didn't use the one and only carrier which services the town. Now if only one carrier thinks its worth servicing a major tourist town like Damascus, why would anyone worry about a little dead spot at Pinkham notch?

paistes5

07-24-2011, 17:25

What? No cell service on 100% of the trail? That's it, I'm staying home.

mudhead

07-24-2011, 17:34

I still can't figure out how fourteen year old sisters can be dirty.

Toolshed

07-24-2011, 17:48

I still can't figure out how fourteen year old sisters can be dirty.
Huh??!??!??! I thought FYOS meant "Find your own signal....."

kanga

07-24-2011, 17:50

I still can't figure out how fourteen year old sisters can be dirty. see? that's close to what i came up with when i googled it.. like i said, dirty.

mudhead

07-24-2011, 17:52

So I had to google it.

Should have seen the day I learned to eat with a fork.

Driver8

07-24-2011, 17:52

Free Your Own Spirit, maybe? Lol. Thanks for the chuckles, you judgmental lot of foul-tempered bassholes. ;)

kanga

07-24-2011, 17:53

you're a basshole.

Driver8

07-24-2011, 17:54

:p :p :p :p

Skidsteer

07-24-2011, 19:06

Free Your Own Spirit, maybe? Lol. Thanks for the chuckles, you judgmental lot of foul-tempered bassholes. ;)

Free my own Spirit?

You have boundary issues.

earlyriser26

07-24-2011, 19:14

I still can't get over the fact that I got a great signal at Antlers campsite in the wilderness. From now on everything is gravy. Counting on a cell signal is crazy. Some of the worst reception I have had is in the Shennys of all places.

Driver8

07-24-2011, 19:44

Free my own Spirit?

You have boundary issues.

If you prefer, you can go fork your own spoon. ...

mikec

07-24-2011, 20:04

Maybe the AMC has or can buy some land that they can lease for a cell phone tower? I've heard of leases in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. A new revenue stream for the AMC?

tdoczi

07-24-2011, 20:10

Maybe the AMC has or can buy some land that they can lease for a cell phone tower? I've heard of leases in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. A new revenue stream for the AMC?

and why would a cell phone provider pay that sort of money to the amc so that a few hikers can FYOS with cell phones that work?

Lone Wolf

07-24-2011, 20:14

Free my own Spirit?

You have boundary issues.he has sheeple issues. i don't have a cell phone. i've been through pinkham a dozen or more times. never had a need to use a phone. why would ya? to find out if your day hikin' , slackin', friends was close by? dude is connected to a cell phone. he'll never really enjot the "outdoors"

Skidsteer

07-24-2011, 21:56

If you prefer, you can go fork your own spoon. ...

I'd prefer to spoon my own...Oh nevermind.

Straight up now, no offense, but why does being unconnected make you uncomfortable?

Driver8

07-24-2011, 23:08

Straight up now, no offense, but why does being unconnected make you uncomfortable?

It doesn't, in itself. Read my posts, particular first page or two of this thread.

Tom Murphy

07-25-2011, 10:47

Migrating Bird

07-25-2011, 17:05

There have been two instances I know of where the lack of cell coverage resulted in deaths which could have been prevented with cell coverage. Now both areas have coverage as a result of public pressure. One was the Northway in the Adirondaks and the other on Rt 8 in Otis/Sandisfield, MA. Both were car accident victims. If you're a friend or family member of the victims, this is reason enough to have cell phone coverage everywhere.

Where does the connectivity debate end: I was hiking in SNP this weekend and during a rest break overheard a conversation that the PATC is currently discussing a real time app for I phones regarding trail conditions including such topics as: water availability, trail conditions (wet, dry, muddy, etc.) shelter and campsite availability, wildlife sightings/warnings, the list goes on and on.

Driver8 just a suggestion, until the cell coverage issue is resolved consider Motorola talk abouts in order to stay in touch. http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=talkabouts&tag=mh0b-20&index=aps&hvadid=159332126&ref=pd_sl_74063cwyvr_e

10-K

07-25-2011, 17:26

If there were cell phone coverage everywhere, maybe that dude in 127 Hours wouldn't have had to cut off his own arm.

.

That's a very good point.

Sly

07-25-2011, 17:29

There have been two instances I know of where the lack of cell coverage resulted in deaths which could have been prevented with cell coverage. Now both areas have coverage as a result of public pressure. One was the Northway in the Adirondaks and the other on Rt 8 in Otis/Sandisfield, MA. Both were car accident victims. If you're a friend or family member of the victims, this is reason enough to have cell phone coverage everywhere.

I'm sorry but that's complete bull****. Lack of cell coverage didn't cause two traffic fatalities, vehicular accidents did. I seriously doubt anyone with a such an injury would be able to make a cell call anyway. They may have been better off with OnStar. You're never going to get complete coverage with cell or even satellite, so people need to stop blaming lack of coverage for their own or families misfortune.

hikerboy57

07-25-2011, 18:00

those who absolutely have to stay connected can buy a satellite phone.people who need to rely on their phone in the wilderness need to stay home.it would be fitting to find out that a backp[acker wnet into an area that had cell coverage, only to find out his battery was dead.sometimes s*** happens, and you need to have an alternate plan.

Migrating Bird

07-25-2011, 18:06

Sly: I'm sorry you think it's BS, check out this http://poststar.com/news/local/article_eaa8dd97-02d9-5cb1-ad5d-ec5c8242ce01.html

kanga

07-25-2011, 18:08

hikerboy57

07-25-2011, 18:10

please. you live in a world where nobody has to take responsibility for their own actions anymore.
i already answered that ., and I'll sue you!!! :)

john gault

07-25-2011, 18:22

Sly: I'm sorry you think it's BS, check out this http://poststar.com/news/local/article_eaa8dd97-02d9-5cb1-ad5d-ec5c8242ce01.html
You can come up with numerous scenarios (real-world, not just hypothetical) in which readily available technology or services resulted in deaths in a remote area, due to a lack of infrastructure in these remote areas. If you think about it, when does it stop? When do we say enough with intrusion into the "wilderness". As technology advances it will become more and more invasive. Just look at trail life today compared to a decade ago...

bobqzzi

07-25-2011, 18:24

There have been two instances I know of where the lack of cell coverage resulted in deaths which could have been prevented with cell coverage. Now both areas have coverage as a result of public pressure.

I'm sure there have been thousands of deaths that cell coverage could possibly have prevented. It is a terrible shame that "public pressure" was able to force the buidling of cell towers. Who paid for those? This type of thinking leads to laws like the one in Massachsetts which requires all cell phones to have a GPS so emergency services can find you. Effectively, all people are required to have a government tracking device.

Sly

07-25-2011, 18:26

Sly: I'm sorry you think it's BS, check out this http://poststar.com/news/local/article_eaa8dd97-02d9-5cb1-ad5d-ec5c8242ce01.html

What I'm saying it's bull**** to expect service every where.

Adirondack Council spokesman John Sheehan said heavy snowfall and road conditions that slowed down ambulance travel contributed to the Canadian truck driver's death, not just the lack of cellular phone service.

"It's tough to blame no cell service for culpability in this case," he said.

Having cellular phone service may not have prevented the man's death, but it would have reduced the wife's anxiety level, Sayward said.

john gault

07-25-2011, 18:27

Sly: I'm sorry you think it's BS, check out this http://poststar.com/news/local/article_eaa8dd97-02d9-5cb1-ad5d-ec5c8242ce01.html

BTW, after reading that story it reminded me of some scientists in Italy being Charged With Manslaughter for not Predicting a 2009 Quake. I hope we don't go down that road http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/05/27/italian-scientist-charged-manslaughter-failing-predict-earthquake/

hikerboy57

07-25-2011, 18:27

exactly. whats next wifi in the shelters. this is the stuff most of us are trying to get away from

Sly

07-25-2011, 18:33

This type of thinking leads to laws like the one in Massachsetts which requires all cell phones to have a GPS so emergency services can find you. Effectively, all people are required to have a government tracking device.

What, I'd like to see that law? As it is, phone companies can triangulate where you are if you have location setting on, or you're placing a call.

Migrating Bird

07-25-2011, 18:35

You can come up with numerous scenarios (real-world, not just hypothetical) in which readily available technology or services resulted in deaths in a remote area, due to a lack of infrastructure in these remote areas. If you think about it, when does it stop? When do we say enough with intrusion into the "wilderness". As technology advances it will become more and more invasive. Just look at trail life today compared to a decade ago...<br><br>
+1

tdoczi

07-25-2011, 18:36

was there ever a law anywhere requiring land line phones to be instaleld in all houses as a safety measure? i mean, think about it. if your house is on fire and you dont have a phone, they delay may cause your house to burn down and take the neighbors with you. or a family member may be in need of emergency medical care and the time it takes you to get to your neighbors phone will doom theem, especially if the neighbor happens to be 1/4 mile away. or, if you live that remotely what if there was a car accident right in front of your house and you were delayed in reporting it because woops, no phone?

all these hypoithetical situations are very much true and yet ive never heard of a landline phone mandate law, have any of you? its because when phones were first invented people didnt like this, weve become... i dont even know what the right word is but its annoying and i dont like. if the phone didnt exist today you could bet people like some of the posters on this thread would be on a mad crusade to make sure we all had a landline just in case we needed it.

cell phone service, such that it is, is a product provided for consumers by companies seeking a profit. thats all it is. that it might save a life from time to time is a coincidence and we should be happy when it does, but not angry when it does not.

Sly

07-25-2011, 18:40

exactly. whats next wifi in the shelters. this is the stuff most of us are trying to get away from

Remind me to carry one of these, next time we go hiking!

13188

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/05/verizon-mifi-personal-wi-fi-coming-this-month/

hikerboy57

07-25-2011, 18:41

Remind me to carry one of these, next time we go hiking!

13187could this be used as a frisbee?

johnnybgood

07-25-2011, 18:58

I'm hoping it's just seen as a novelty on the trail and hikers realize they don't need all this sh$%.

Just my two cents , not that anyone actually cares. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....

WingedMonkey

07-25-2011, 19:09

It's like saying that the AMC wouldn't let me in a hut and I had to hike on and fell ruined my hike, so it's their fault.
;)

vamelungeon

07-25-2011, 19:23

Cell phones save lives and cell phones contribute to wasted resources. I take my Blackberry hiking but leave it off to save the battery until I stop somewhere, then I turn it on and check in with my wife IF I have service. If I don't have service IN THE MOUNTAINS I don't get bent out of shape because MOUNTAINS block uhf radio waves. Simple physics. I don't expect to have service everywhere when I hike because of this. I do like being able to send pictures of the beautiful places I get to see to my Facebook and in text messages, and my friends and family enjoy the pictures. If I can't send any images, no big deal. I take the pictures and put them up later. I hate to break it to some people, but cell phones aren't new technology and they are here to stay, and they are going to be used on trails. I also hate to break it to some people but you can't expect cell phone service everywhere in mountainous terrain. Unless, as has been pointed out, there is money to be made there is no reason for cell towers to be erected (haha I said erected). Who knows, in a few years sat phones may be common and cells will be as outdated as floppy disks.

Sly

07-25-2011, 19:32

It's like saying that the AMC wouldn't let me in a hut and I had to hike on and fell ruined my hike, so it's their fault.
;)

Cute, but you got it wrong. I didn't blame the AMC for ending my hike, I thought the caretaker was a dickhead for rejecting me and allowing another to stay. The point being I don't care what the croo dude says next time, if I feel I'm unable, or risking injury, I'm staying put.

Lone Wolf

07-25-2011, 20:31

Cute, but you got it wrong. I didn't blame the AMC for ending my hike, I thought the caretaker was a dickhead for rejecting me and allowing another to stay. The point being I don't care what the croo dude says next time, if I feel I'm unable, or risking injury, I'm staying put.if the huts weren't there you're ****rd. plan better next time. you counted on a man-made structure

Driver8

07-25-2011, 21:29

Driver8,

I have tried to read all of your posts and this is how I understand your situation/opinion.

You expected there would be cell phone service at the AMC buildings. Your party was split up and the inability to call each other was frustrating.

You are not advocating cell phone service everywhere nor are you advocating cell phones as a back-country safety tool.

Hope I got that right. Here are my comments:

Pinkham Notch is a trailhead in the White Mountains National Forest with a number of AMC support buildings. If you think of it in those terms, the lack of cell phone service is not as big of a surprise.

With the advent of cell phone service, we are now conditioned to being able to reach each other instanteously and that adds to the furstration. It wasn't always that way. There is a generational gap between those of us who grew up with house phones and pay phones and those of us who grew up with cell phones. Which side of that gap you are on greatly affects your perspective.

Now a number of posts read into your original posts a sense of entitlement that you may or may not have. But your word choice did open up that door IMO.

I think, Tom, you've summed it up pretty fairly. Thanks for taking the trouble to read what I've written, rather than insert thoughts for me.

I think I unwittingly, unintentionally exposed big gap here. On the one hand is me, somewhat the utilitarian day hiker, thinking: "Pinkham Notch has a lot of hiker and other traffic, and the many hikers are of varying degrees of expertise*, so it would make sense as a safety measure to have a cell tower unobtrusively placed there. Likewise, pretty much, with the relatively developed summit." I think I reflect what most day hikers would opine on the matter. On the other hand are a few, passionate folk who hate cell phones, period, or surely hate them out in the woods. Many of them probably don't care much to see other people out on trail, for that matter.

So I, Mr. Utilitarian Day Hiker, stroll in with the confidence that everyone will see this the same way I do. After all, Pinkham and the summit are busy areas, reasonably developed, it wouldn't be such a big deal, provided the finances aren't outlandish (I don't think it would and have put out an inquiry or two to knowledgable friends), so what's the big deal? I believe it is my confident brashness, plus the odiousness of my viewpoint to some here, that has set off the fire. Along the lines of - who the hell do you think you are, assuming everybody wants this and it's just obvious?!? FYOS!" ;)

I knew that lots of people here, myself included, don't care for obnoxious cell phone usage on trail, or anywhere else, at that. I hadn't participated to any significant extent, though, in what likely are plenty of hatin'-on-cell-phone threads here and just didn't have a clue about the depth of hostility among many here toward cell phones, period, much less their invasion of the wilderness, which I sympathize with greatly and to a great extent agree with.

I stand by thinking, however, that a tower at Pinkham and at Mt. W summit would be net positives. This is wilderness, yes, kinda. There's the development at the summit. The auto toll road. The huts in T Ravine. Rt 16. The Cog Rail. And thousands of hikers a day tromping around in the summer. A little cell service to accommodate their safety and communication needs - especially of the very mild and unobtrusive sort my party and I sought last Tuesday - is a marginal and small additional encroachment on the already significantly compromised wilderness in the area. It's not, to my mind at least, the straw which will break the camel's back. For that, look to global climate change.

Cell tower on Katahdin? NO! 100 Mile Wilderness? Nuh uh. Ditto Bigelows and Mahoosucs. At Pinkham and W - with signs saying "please keep your usage to near the bases and to a minimum needed on trail, thanks" - yes, I think so. If that makes me an ogre in the minds of a fearsomely dedicated few, I can live with that. :)

Lone Wolf

07-25-2011, 21:35

Cell tower on Katahdin? NO! 100 Mile Wilderness? Nuh uh. Ditto Bigelows and Mahoosucs. At Pinkham and W - with signs saying "please keep your usage to near the bases and to a minimum needed on trail, thanks" - yes, I think so. If that makes me an ogre in the minds of a fearsomely dedicated few, I can live with that. :)why not? have you been to these places. lotsa truckers drive in the "100 mile notsowilderness". if they wreck a cell would come in handy. you seem selfish

Driver8

07-25-2011, 21:44

if the huts weren't there you're ****rd. plan better next time. you counted on a man-made structure

YEAH! Don't get injured, sucker! If you do, you didn't PLAN well enough and clearly are a pathetic louse. Dismissed - I'm off to further feats of faux ferality ... and a Felini flick. ...

Driver8

07-25-2011, 21:46

why not? have you been to these places. lotsa truckers drive in the "100 mile notsowilderness". if they wreck a cell would come in handy. you seem selfish

Let them eat sat phones. If they can't they're not tough enough - I'll filet them and eat them in my sleep. You're welcome - as you were. ...

Lone Wolf

07-25-2011, 21:48

Let them eat sat phones. If they can't they're not tough enough - I'll filet them and eat them in my sleep. You're welcome - as you were. ...you're to wimpy for the "outdoors"

Driver8

07-25-2011, 21:59

you're to wimpy for the "outdoors"

Thanks - that means so much to me! P.S.: You have spelling, grammar and punctutation issues. :sun

tdoczi

07-25-2011, 22:04

Thanks - that means so much to me! P.S.: You have spelling, grammar and punctutation issues. :sun

you have boundary issues, fourteen year old sister.

The Old Fhart

07-25-2011, 22:27

Driver8 -“….which would be afforded by a small cost to improve cell service in the area, as I've outlined.” ….. “….given how cheap and easy is the fix” ….. “We're talking two well-developed and highly-frequented places, Pinkham and the summit.”

Two cell towers-cheap? Perhaps you should check the cost of constructing a cell tower. Construction cost, running cables and power, and maintenance in the mountains would likely almost double the cost quoted below. Google and you’ll find:

$150,000 - This is the average cost of a cell phone tower, more or less but you'll need at least this much to complete the project. If you don't have that kind of money, you'll need to secure a loan that you personally guarantee with other collateral. Don't make the mistake of expecting the bank to finance a tower construction project like a commercial building or residential home.

So You want someone else to spend over ½ million dollars just because you’re too lazy to walk inside Pinkham and use a pay phone? :rolleyes:

Sierra Echo

07-25-2011, 22:33

Thanks - that means so much to me! P.S.: You have spelling, grammar and punctutation issues. :sun

Generally, people resort to insulting peoples spelling, grammar and punctuation when they realize they have lost whatever the argument at hand is.

Driver8

07-25-2011, 22:50

Yes, Sierra, Lone Wolf has been straight to and all about the substantive issues here. Couldn't possibly just be that he was tweaking me and I was tweaking him back, could it?

Sierra Echo

07-25-2011, 22:51

But if you are going to do then you should think outside the box. Be creative. Don't fall into a generalized pattern.
Now let the CREATIVE tweaking begin!

Driver8

07-25-2011, 22:58

But if you are going to do then you should think outside the box. Be creative. Don't fall into a generalized pattern.
Now let the CREATIVE tweaking begin!

:) Lone Wolf's not worth my A material. He gets B- at best. ...

Sierra Echo

07-25-2011, 23:02

:) Lone Wolf's not worth my A material. He gets B- at best. ...

Ouch!! LOL
Now that was much better!

Driver8

07-25-2011, 23:08

So You want someone else to spend over ½ million dollars just because you’re too lazy to walk inside Pinkham and use a pay phone? :rolleyes:

Clearly your Google search string was better than mine, Fhart - I got a Wikipedia article on cell towers and signals which gave nothing on price, and nothing else nearly as useful in the first three results pages. Tip of the cap to you there.

Your reading comp is off, though. If you'd read my OP and others spelling out my view, for comprehension, you'd see that part of my point is that a good 2000 hikers pass through Pinkham daily mid-summer and similar numbers at the summit, and the call volume flowing through the locales would easily be in the 100K's per year. Doubtless you're smart enough to see that the 1/2 million $ or so, over the life cycle of the towers, would be amortized over more than just my lazy no-good self, wretched though I be. I mean, I am immensely important, but I don't insist on my own personal cell tower at these two locations. Hope this clears that up for you! :)

Sly

07-25-2011, 23:19

if the huts weren't there you're ****rd. plan better next time. you counted on a man-made structure

You can try again too. I was planning on staying in the foyer of the closed hut, but I could have just of easily camped. What I didn't plan on was getting thrown off the mountain by an ******* from the AMC.

What's ****rd?

weary

07-25-2011, 23:47

that sounds dirty. if that's the case, you should probably FYOS. in the meantime, here is a trail, with cell service, that you can probably handle:

http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/recreation/wilderness-back-trail-adventure/

now quit whining. if you're going to go in the woods, you should expect NO cell service. carry on.
MY advice is to never, under any circumstances, carry a cell phone on any trail. That way the lack of cell phone service will never be an issue. Millions climbed the presidentials before the devices were invented. They are wisely illegal on equally difficult Katahdin, though violators rarely, if ever, are apprehended.

The devices result in scores of rescues that otherwise would be unnecessary. More importantly, just the fact of carrying the devices cause many people to quit a climb that they would otherwise complete, and thus adventures of a lifetime are lost.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 02:13

MY advice is to never, under any circumstances, carry a cell phone on any trail. That way the lack of cell phone service will never be an issue. Millions climbed the presidentials before the devices were invented. They are wisely illegal on equally difficult Katahdin, though violators rarely, if ever, are apprehended.

My cell phone, for the time being, is also my camera (its more important use 99% of the time on trail). So it will join me on my treks until, at least, I get a fancier camera. Probably after that.

It has never been anything but useful and convenient to me in my hikes. Certainly never an excuse or a reason for not continuing a hike or for cutting one short. Leg cramps last week? Hyperthermia one day last summer and hypothemia once this past winter? Yes to all. The Droid? Nope, not a once. Seldom does it get used as a phone on trail - maybe 10 times in 60 hikes in the past 13 mos, half of those incoming calls. ...

Lone Wolf

07-26-2011, 06:32

Yes, Sierra, Lone Wolf has been straight to and all about the substantive issues here. Couldn't possibly just be that he was tweaking me and I was tweaking him back, could it?wasn't try to tweak anybody. just pointin' out how childish your demands for cell service are. really dude, stay in your safe home and don't go to the white mountains for your little day hikes

rickb

07-26-2011, 07:23

The point being I don't care what the croo dude says next time, if I feel I'm unable, or risking injury, I'm staying put.

I would as well.

My guess is that the likelyhood a a crew member attempting to physically removing me (or anyone, for that matter) is next to zero.

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 07:28

Okay, heres the deal. Many of us cherish any wildness we can still find on this planet, and we wish to preserve as much of this wildness as we can. we hike the AT to learn to be self reliant, to learn TO DO WITHOUT, to learn that we've become too reliant on others to substitute for our own sense of personal responsibility. that there are consequences to making poor choices in the wild, and learn to make better ones.If you really need to stay connected 24/7, stay home, or visit a park, and dont forget extra batteries.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 10:08

wasn't try to tweak anybody. just pointin' out how childish your demands for cell service are. really dude, stay in your safe home and don't go to the white mountains for your little day hikes

Again, it is so cool that you're looking out for me, man. How lucky am I?!?

Driver8

07-26-2011, 10:10

Okay, heres the deal. Many of us cherish any wildness we can still find on this planet, and we wish to preserve as much of this wildness as we can. we hike the AT to learn to be self reliant, to learn TO DO WITHOUT, to learn that we've become too reliant on others to substitute for our own sense of personal responsibility.

Funny. I hike in order to further my career as a fashion model and infomercial pitch man, and it's doing wonders for me. ...

Lone Wolf

07-26-2011, 10:51

Funny. I hike in order to further my career as a fashion model obviously not enuf. what do you model? tents? :cool:

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 11:18

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 11:18

i have to admit though, it keeps me entertained while Im here at work.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 11:23

So glad Weary used a free speech argument to challenge my early attempt to ask the mods to be merciful to the OP. Not only do I agree that free speech applies to those with different opinions, but sometimes letting them continue on a rant can be entertaining. I appreciate Weary removing me of any responsibility for guilt.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 11:27

If I was a friend of the OP I would counsel him to "stay down" in the context of boxing. Of course he certainly has the right of free speech and I would never want to abridge his rights.

kanga

07-26-2011, 11:47

i think he should buy a spot.

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 11:53

i think he should buy a spot.he doesnt need to be found, he needs to hook up withhis friends.
I can see it now :"welcome to Maine, Life as it should be"and underneath-"visit us on facebook".LOL *** OMG :)

Cuffs

07-26-2011, 11:53

Are we sure Minnie didnt make a new screen name??

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 11:55

i think he should buy a spot.

If a spot works at Pinkham Notch it should be a case of problem solved.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 11:58

he doesnt need to be found, he needs to hook up withhis friends.
:)

If he and his friends all had spot devices certainly there would be a cost effective way to communicate between themselves. Even if it required coordination by SAR.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 12:05

obviously not enuf. what do you model? tents? :cool:

Wolfskins.

Cuffs

07-26-2011, 12:08

i think he should buy a spot.

PLEASE!! Dont encourage him!

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 12:09

why do they have to talk at all?I was dayhiking in Minnewaska State park last year, miles from nowhere, in a beautiful spot, complete silence.....complete.after sitting for about as half hour, I began to hear some hikers yapping away from who knows how far. within 10 minutes, a group of 15 orientals came waltzing by, yapping loudly, they saw me as they passed and waved. I put my fingr to my lips, and one walked over to me. I told him"your voices dont belong here". He nodded , turned to his friends who immediately became quiet. I smiled, they went on their way, and as soon as they were out of sight, the yapping continued. I smiled to myself and just shook my head.

Cuffs

07-26-2011, 12:10

Its folks like you yammering on your damn phones while in the woods that makes our experiences crap. I came close once, and damn near shoved a cell phone up a guys azz once for being a beligirant prick. Trust me, if we ever cross paths, you could suffer the same fate.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 12:20

Wolfskins.

One more try. Stay down.

AaronMB

07-26-2011, 12:21

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk

Driver8

07-26-2011, 12:26

driver8, I can only say you must have married a cell phone, as you cant seem to detach from it.Ive tried to summarize many of the feelings that I and many here share for your benefit, but I dont think you'll quite understand what Im trying to relate until you've learned to do without your toys.Read John Muir, read emerson and thoreau, read edward abbey most of all.read Guy and Laura waterman.read some of the responses here.you do need to grow up.

Reading? What's that? And John Muir? Who's he? Is that the guy who tromped around the Sierra Nevada and met person to person, with only a guide and photographer in attendance, with Teddy Roosevelt at Yosemite, eliciting greater efforts from TR to protect Yosemite and other wild areas? The guy who figured out that glacier action carved out much of the Y Valley? Who lost on Heche Hechy, regrettably, but won so much more? Who founded the Sierra Club?

And who is this Thoreau guy? Did he stay at that cabin next to Walden Pond and climb Greylock, Mt. W, Katahdin and countless other mountains, singing their praises far and wide? Wrote something about the Maine Woods and the Concord and the Merrimack, something else about civil disobedience? Emerson? Self-reliance? Something along those lines?

And of course I wouldn't know anything about Edward Abbey and the monkey wrench gang, having worked as an environmental canvasser and activist for three years. Also never met Bill Cronon or Bill McKibben.

Couldn't possibly know anything about any of the above, because I don't share your opinion on the idea of placing a cell tower at two busy locations where it might save a life and afford convenience to a large number of people with very small imposition on the environment. One must toe hikerboy's line, absolutely, no exceptions, elsewise one has no clue about anything important. ...

Sarcasm aside, h/b, I am a populist environmentalist. I believe that since people are the chief threat to our environmental balance, the better acquainted the the more of them become with wild nature and the fonder, the more likely they are to vote and to do other things to protect and to preserve it. Since large numbers of them, many inexpert to such an extent as to make me look like Lone Wolf (I shudder at that thought), get out to Greylock and Mt. Washington and Acadia, for instance, I think it a good idea for them to be safe and able to communicate to the extent reasonably feasible while in those places.

You and I simply have a different view of this. I am fine that you disagree with me - not sure why you can't accept that I do with you without some need to marginalize me as ignorant of or unappreciative of the virtues of wild nature, pretty presumptuous and self-righteous on your part. I don't need to assign you some reading list or talk down to you. Shame that you feel this compulsion toward me.

bigmac_in

07-26-2011, 12:28

:) Lone Wolf's not worth my A material. He gets B- at best. ...

You would need to actually HAVE A material. Haven't seen it yet - are you saving it for something?

Driver8

07-26-2011, 12:28

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 12:31

you may have read the books, but you certainly didnt get the message.Muir would head into a thunderstorm with a blanket and a roll.and please reread Walden.I agree that more people exposed to the outdoors is a good thing, but where we disagree is the need to keep wild places wild.and Im not being presumptuous in my belief you have entitlement issues.Thousands and thousands of visitors to the whites have done without cell phones and their towers for hundredss of years. they're unnecessary and unwanted.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 12:33

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk

At least the horse stayed down.

Lone Wolf

07-26-2011, 12:36

kanga

07-26-2011, 12:36

dead horses usually aren't self-righteous by nature.

Lone Wolf

07-26-2011, 12:39

it, that is...........

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 12:42

dead horses usually aren't self-righteous by nature.doesnt mean they dont still need a good flogging

Driver8

07-26-2011, 12:43

but where we disagree is the need to keep wild places wild.and Im not being presumptuous in my belief you have entitlement issues.

A) The Mt. Washington area, with so many people scrambling about it and so many human-imposed scars on its landscape, is only marginally wild. I think since so many people are out there, a couple cell towers for their safety and communication would be a minimal additional imposition on that wildness. I get and respect both that you disagree and why you do. In fact, if you wanted to take out the auto road and certainly the cog railway, however, H/b, I'd be right there with you on that issue.

B) The presumption is not in your view of my attitudes on this issue of my purported sense of "entitlement". Do you not see that? It's in your assumption that I must be a complete ignorant nincompoop who has no clue of the virtues of the wild just because you and I disagree on this specific cell transmitter issue. You are so self-righteous and intolerant, so irrationally blinded by your anger, that you cannot see I probably agree with you 95% or more on the broader set of issues pertaining to the wild, and have lifted my hand, my mind and my voice to their protection far more than you imagine.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 12:46

dead horses usually aren't self-righteous by nature.

And they have the horse sense to stay down and not keep digging when they are already buried.

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 13:10

Im not angry, Im amused.the cog railway is privaztely owned, and a separate issue altogether. and your original post said nothing about survival, just about you not being able to check on your friends. A person who relies on a cell phone on or off the trail for personal safety is making a big mistake. batteries do not last long in areas where the signal is sparse, and a cell phone with a dead battery is just dead weight

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 13:17

lastly its not just me that you disagree with, but about 99% of the responders to your post.come join us. repent.throw away your cell phone and experience the freedom of the hills!! and Im only intolerant of people who dont think, look and act like me.

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 13:17

You are so self-righteous and intolerant, so irrationally blinded by your anger, that you cannot see

Who is the one assuming and presuming?

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 13:39

thisthread is like a train wreck I can't look away from.
Driver8., the more people carry cell phones, thinking this will bring them to safety, the more people will die, and put others lives in jeopardy.what part of THAT dont you understand.As I suggested days ago, speak to the SAr teams. get their opinion..and although Mt washingtonis heavily used, it is still very much wild.It is the single most deadly mountain in the world under 10,000 ft.
You seem to have a good knowledge of history; I can tell you the history of the combustion engine, but I cant build one.

Tom Murphy

07-26-2011, 13:49

A) The Mt. Washington area, with so many people scrambling about it and so many human-imposed scars on its landscape, is only marginally wild. I think since so many people are out there, a couple cell towers for their safety and communication would be a minimal additional imposition on that wildness. I get and respect both that you disagree and why you do. In fact, if you wanted to take out the auto road and certainly the cog railway, however, H/b, I'd be right there with you on that issue.

Hi again,

When I suggested that you read Guy & Laura Waterman I didn't mean to imply that you were uneducated. I suggest Wilderness Ethics to you and to all who haven't read it because the book deals directly with the issues we are discussing touching on here. I will shameless plagiarize a bit what I can from memory.

What are we seeking when we enter the "wilderness"? If there is no risk, no danger, no "wildness", then a trip to the mountains and to the forests becomes a trip to the gym.

Example:
A long winter day hike to a remote peak was accomplished via a particularly challenging bushwhack. Upon arrival at the summit, one of the party used a cell phone to call home. The illusion of "wildness" was destroyed and the sense of accomplishment diminished. The hikers all knew that these peaks had been denuded over a 100 years ago but the illusion of wildness had held until that phone call.

You seem to prefer to think of Pinkham Notch as the Mt Washington Hiking Resort. I prefer to think of it as a trailhead access to the High Peaks of the Presidential Range. Looking at this from my perspective, do you see why I love the fact that cell phones don't work there? Because I can see your perspective too, the summit and trailhead is already mucked up so much what it a little bit more.

But, although I can empathize with your position, I still feel compelled to stand in the breach, and say, "Enough, no more! It stops here and now, before our entire country is a sanitized, bubble-wrapped playground, a cruel Disneyified caricature of what it once was".

<I feel better now, might need to go back on my meds>

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 13:53

Ive lived in NY my whole life, and I actually prefer the old times square with its pimps drugs and hookers to the times square of today, which is no different than any other city . all personality has been completely sucked out of it. i dont want the same to happen to the "wild places I cherish, and I'll still maintained it would put more lives in danger , rather than fewer.
I have to go back to work now.

Blissful

07-26-2011, 14:13

The AT is not a wild place by any means. I went to wild places, like out in southern Colorado and Wyoming where there is nothing. I saw huge wide open spaces and was on trails with NO ONE for miles. We didn't even see a soul in the backcountry trails of Yellowstone. Nothing like the congested east and its trails straddling metro areas and the like. Heck I even had cell coverage in the (ahem) 100 mile wilderness - that had youth groups galore on its trails.

As for my cell phone, I like it to keep in touch with my beloved spouse once a day. Am I glad I have it? Pay phones in town would do me fine. Instinct serves me good in the woods. But since I am in the congested, unwild east - might as well use my cell to phone home.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 15:03

Hi again,

When I suggested that you read Guy & Laura Waterman I didn't mean to imply that you were uneducated. I suggest Wilderness Ethics to you and to all who haven't read it because the book deals directly with the issues we are discussing touching on here. I will shameless plagiarize a bit what I can from memory.

What are we seeking when we enter the "wilderness"? If there is no risk, no danger, no "wildness", then a trip to the mountains and to the forests becomes a trip to the gym.

Example:
A long winter day hike to a remote peak was accomplished via a particularly challenging bushwhack. Upon arrival at the summit, one of the party used a cell phone to call home. The illusion of "wildness" was destroyed and the sense of accomplishment diminished. The hikers all knew that these peaks had been denuded over a 100 years ago but the illusion of wildness had held until that phone call.

You seem to prefer to think of Pinkham Notch as the Mt Washington Hiking Resort. I prefer to think of it as a trailhead access to the High Peaks of the Presidential Range. Looking at this from my perspective, do you see why I love the fact that cell phones don't work there? Because I can see your perspective too, the summit and trailhead is already mucked up so much what it a little bit more.

But, although I can empathize with your position, I still feel compelled to stand in the breach, and say, "Enough, no more! It stops here and now, before our entire country is a sanitized, bubble-wrapped playground, a cruel Disneyified caricature of what it once was".

<I feel better now, might need to go back on my meds>

Hi Tom - I take all you've said here fondly, as you are considerate and courteous and reasonable. I've heard of the Watermans but don't think I've read them except possibly in a magazine article or essay along the way. I don't look at Pinkham as a hiking resort, in fact I like that it's understated and unpolished - rustic and utilitarian, no frills. I believe my energetic way of expressing myself in my initial post gave an overstated impression of my feeling about this - it's easy to see, looking back, how that could be and how some people already good and worked up over the cell phone issue saw that as an opportunity to pounce upon the infidel. I don't mind a good scrap and don't take it personally.

I was surprised there's no service at PN and yes, in the event, tuckered out as I was, hungry and sore and somewhat concerned for my un-accounted-for fellow hiking party members, I was also inconvenienced. I did somehow live through it and have, to the evident consternation of some here have survived the outrageous slings and arrows of this silly little shooting gallery. The funny thing lost on some of the pea shooters here is that neither I nor any in my party did rely on our cell phones for rescue or safety, only for communication and then only minimally. We got up and down as much of the mountain as we could, each of us, safely, relying on our plans, our wits and the extent of our physical capabilities. The slight extent to which we did communicate via our cell phones was of considerable comfort and convenience.

beakerman

07-26-2011, 15:12

upset because there isn't cell service on a trail through the woods?!

My brother's house is only a mile or so outside of town and he gets no cell reception due to geography. Y'all need to get out more and be more self relient. People lived in the woods for centuries before the cell phone was even tought of...now some seem incapable of walking through it for a few days without one. That is a sad state of affairs.

As for SAR/cell phones I think the biggest problem there is when people get in trouble they don't know where they are in reality. In most cases SAR is about finding someone...prople that are accidentally injured on the trail are not the common ut it does happen. In those cases teh cell phone is the perfect tool becasue even if you took a bad spill and snapped your leg while on the trail you know you are indeed on the trail and just in need of extraction. Whereas if you are indeed lost and calling for help that cell phone isn't going to do you much good. Sure triangulation from the towers can get reasonably close but unless you have a gps enabled phone you are hosed. If you do have a gps enabled phone and have gps data why are you lost? Its about knowing how the darned things work and how to use the tools you have when you need them.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 15:17

kanga

07-26-2011, 15:18

As for my cell phone, I like it to keep in touch with my beloved spouse once a day. Am I glad I have it? Pay phones in town would do me fine. Instinct serves me good in the woods. But since I am in the congested, unwild east - might as well use my cell to phone home.

that is the same rationalization that people who throw their trash out the windows of their cars use.

john gault

07-26-2011, 15:25

Welcome, latecomer! :welcome This just in: the Millenium has passed, Obama is President and Bin Laden is dead. Oh, and Tiger Woods is not such a big deal any more. ...
...and the "science" of global warming has been proven to be total bunk:)

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 15:32

driver8-after all the responses you've seemingly read, you still choose to perpetuate an argument that shouldnt exist. putting cell towers on every mountain top will not save as many lives as it puts in jeopardy.from a safety standpoint, as well the preservation standppoint, you lose the argument. Your responses calling everyone who disgarees with childish names just shows your maturity level.Ive enjoyed this tirade, only because its a welcome distraction from work. But until you can produce a professional SAR that endorses cell phone use and the building of additional towers specifically in the Whites, then you will continue to lose the debate.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 15:55

...and the "science" of global warming has been proven to be total bunk:)

In your mind, for what that's worth. ...

Driver8

07-26-2011, 15:57

driver8-after all the responses you've seemingly read, you still choose to perpetuate an argument that shouldnt exist.

Translation: I still disagree with you, and you still can't handle that. ... "Argument that shouldn't exist"? What is this, Stalinist Russia? lol. ...

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 16:04

I finally figuresd it out, your a lawyer.noone would so try to defend an indefensible position as strongly as your attempt.But there is hope for you. throw away your phone. repent, come out of the dark side into the light, we do share some common ground, we can expand that common ground. but you must leave the phone home and come into the light. dont be afraid.we'll take care of you. teach you nurture you, teach you how you can use the hologram on your credit card as a signal mirror to signal your friends you're okay.dont be afraid. leave the phone home.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 16:17

hikerboy57

07-26-2011, 16:26

powdered gatorade. come into the light. dont be afraid. you might like it.we put our differences aside and just love the trail. your an intelligent person, just a little misguided. repent. join us. we will welcome you with open arms.recognize your argument as flawed.not once have you mentioned any downside to your idea. repent. dont be afraid.

Driver8

07-26-2011, 20:01

AaronMB

07-26-2011, 20:13

...The funny thing lost on some of the pea shooters here is that neither I nor any in my party did rely on our cell phones for rescue or safety, only for communication and then only minimally. We got up and down as much of the mountain as we could, each of us, safely, relying on our plans, our wits and the extent of our physical capabilities. The slight extent to which we did communicate via our cell phones was of considerable comfort and convenience.

But it seems you did. You assumed that you would have service and that assumption substituted for proper planning, communication and decision making, before your party separated. Your group, armed with cellular phones, had a false sense of security.

I asked before: if you had known you would not have cellular service would you still have let the party separate, considering your concern for those in your group whose ages raised questions about their health/capabilities?

SGT Rock

07-26-2011, 21:06

nufsaid

07-26-2011, 21:24

What a stupid proposition in the first place. That every place should have cell phone connection and use "saving lives" to support your point, when clearly you just want to call your friends and say: "guess where I am calling from". I see it enough in the Smokies.

I agree that expecting cell coverage over the entire trail is absurd. I would rather see other people's money spent on a guaranteed source of potable water every 10 miles or so no more that 10 feet off the trail. After all water is vital to maintaining life.

SGT Rock

07-26-2011, 21:27

Anyone remember this list?

These are (supposedly) actual comments left last year on Forest Service registration sheets and comment cards by backpackers completing wilderness camping trips:"A small deer came into my camp and stole my bag of pickles. Is there a way I can get reimbursed? Please call."
"Escalators would help on steep uphill sections."
"Instead of a permit system or regulations, the Forest Service needs to reduce worldwide population growth to limit the number of visitors to wilderness."
"Trails need to be wider so people can walk while holding hands."
"Ban walking sticks in wilderness. Hikers that use walking stick are more likely to chase animals."
"All the mile markers are missing this year."
"Found a smoldering cigarette left by a horse."
"Trails need to be reconstructed. Please avoid building trails that go uphill."
"Too many bugs and leeches and spiders and spider webs. Please spray the wilderness to rid the area of these pests."
"Please pave the trails so they can be plowed of snow in the winter."
"Chairlifts need to be in some places so that we can get to wonderful views without having to hike to them."
"The coyotes made too much noise last night and kept me awake. Please eradicate these annoying animals."
"Reflectors need to be placed on trees every 50 feet so people can hike at night with flashlights."
"Need more signs to keep area pristine."
I guess we should add one more: "I couldn't call my friends from Pinkman Notch. Please make make sure you get a tower on that immediately for my safety."

Probably also needs training wheels for a backpack to prevent tipping over.

tdoczi

07-26-2011, 22:16

We got up and down as much of the mountain as we could, each of us, safely, relying on our plans, our wits and the extent of our physical capabilities. The slight extent to which we did communicate via our cell phones was of considerable comfort and convenience. whoa whoa whoa... comfort and conveneince? are you talking about a stay at the north conway holiday inn or did you go hiking?and as i have said to no avail and others have also tried, your "plan" was "call me later on your cell." and that is NOT a plan. its an excuse to not plan.

DavidNH

07-27-2011, 00:01

If you can't or won't hike without cell phone service then get the heck off the trail. The hiking community will be better off without the likes of you,.

john gault

07-27-2011, 09:16

In your mind, for what that's worth. ...
Yeah, not just my mind. That's why these AGW guys had to write a paper trying to explain why there's been no observable warming between 1998 - 2008. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/29/11790.abstract

Driver8

07-27-2011, 09:34

Yeah, not just my mind. That's why these AGW guys had to write a paper trying to explain why there's been no observable warming between 1998 - 2008. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/29/11790.abstract

You cite an abstract. Have you read the whole article? Does this one article constitute your entire case? Do you think it's a good idea to belch a bunch of CO2 into the atmosphere, unchecked, and to deforest millions of acres per year, unremediated? Lastly, what does this have to do with the great cataclysm which would be the addition of two cell towers in the Mt. Washington area? Focus, man! ;)

Sly

07-27-2011, 09:36

john gault

07-27-2011, 09:43

Welcome, latecomer! :welcome This just in: the Millenium has passed, Obama is President and Bin Laden is dead. Oh, and Tiger Woods is not such a big deal any more. ...

You cite an abstract. Have you read the whole article? Does this one article constitute your entire case? Do you think it's a good idea to belch a bunch of CO2 into the atmosphere, unchecked, and to deforest millions of acres per year, unremediated? Lastly, what does this have to do with the great cataclysm which would be the addition of two cell towers in the Mt. Washington area? Focus, man! ;)

I was just completing your summation of the new millenium. Maybe you need to focus;)

Driver8

07-27-2011, 09:45

You're climbing up Madison or Wildcat hand over hand, your cell phone rings, you go to answer, you slip, you fall, you die! Thanks to the new tower at Pinkham Notch, they know within 100 feet of where your dead body lies.

You call from a good reception area on Boott Spur Trail to check in with a part of your party which split off. You get through and find everyone's OK and confirm when everyone should be back to base, setting everyone's mind at ease. The nearest hiker, a mile away at Harvard Rock, detects instinctively, his wild senses heightened to a peak by the backcountry experience that is the W summit, that you have thus raped the wilderness and, anguished into a stupor, stumbles off this perch to his death. You, clearly a murderer, are apprehended, brought up on charges, convicted and put away for life. ...

Driver8

07-27-2011, 09:47

I was just completing your summation of the new millenium. Maybe you need to focus;)

Talk about drinking the kool-aid. Sucker born every minute. ...

john gault

07-27-2011, 09:48

Oh, goood one...yeah right...:rolleyes:

tdoczi

07-27-2011, 10:34

You call from a good reception area on Boott Spur Trail to check in with a part of your party which split off. You get through and find everyone's OK and confirm when everyone should be back to base, setting everyone's mind at ease. T...

what no one here besides you understands is why this phone call was at all necessary. it wasnt, nor was the call from pinkham that you wanted to make but could not. now if the story went something like "i called from boot spur and someone was injured, since i knew i was able to rescue them. good thing i wasnt down at pinkham or the trouble would have been made worse by lack of cell signal." i wouldnt agree with that argument, but at least youd have an argument.

i'll be out hiking for the next 4 days. my sister, who is afraid of the woods and everything in it, will be very much ill at ease the whole time i am gone. should we make sure the area in which i am hiking has continual cell coverage so she can contact me hourly in order to remain at ease? if i were making this argument it would be no less ridiculous than the one you are making.

and no, my sister is not fourteen.