America's Park Weigh Solitude Against Cellular Access

[Mags]

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/te...cess-1B8040227

As cell phones, iPods and laptops creep steadily into every corner of modern life, America's national parks have stayed largely off the digital grid, among the last remaining outposts of ringtone-free human solitude.
For better or worse, that may soon change.
Under pressure from telecommunications companies and a growing number of park visitors who feel adrift without mobile-phone reception, the airwaves in such grand getaway destinations as Yellowstone National Park may soon be abuzz with new wireless signals.
That prospect has given pause to a more traditional cohort of park visitors who cherish the unplugged tranquility of the great outdoors, fearing an intrusion of mobile phones — and the sound of idle chatter — will diminish their experience.
Some have mixed emotions. Stephanie Smith, a 50-something Montana native who visits Yellowstone as many as six times a year, said she prefers the cry of an eagle to ring tones.
But she also worries that future generations may lose their appreciation for the value of nature and the need to preserve America's outdoor heritage if a lack of technology discourages them from visiting.
"You have to get there to appreciate it," Smith said. "It's a new world — and technology is a part of it."
Balancing the two aesthetics has emerged as the latest challenge facing the National Park Service as managers in at least two premier parks, Yellowstone and Glacier national parks, consider recent requests to install new telecommunications towers or upgrade existing ones.
There is no system-wide rule governing cellular facilities in the 300 national parks, national monuments and other units the agency administers nationwide. Wireless infrastructure decisions are left up to the managers of individual park units.
The agency's mission statement requires it to protect park resources and the visitor experience, but each individual experience is unique, said Lee Dickinson, a special-uses program manager for the Park Service.
"I've had two visitors calling me literally within hours of each other who wanted exactly the opposite experience: One saying he didn't vacation anywhere without electronic access and the other complaining he was disturbed by another park visitor ordering pizza on his cell phone," Dickinson said.
Can you hear me now?
Wireless supporters say more is at stake than the convenience of casual phone conversations. Cellular providers say new wireless infrastructure will boost public safety by improving communications among park rangers and emergency responders.

They argue that the ability to download smartphone applications that can deliver instant information on plants and animals will also enrich park visitors' experiences.
"Our customers are telling us that having access to technology will enhance their visit to wild areas," said Bob Kelley, spokesman for Verizon Wireless, which is seeking to install a new 100-foot cell tower at Yellowstone.
Rural communities that border the national parks also stand to benefit from enlarged cellular coverage areas.
On the other side of the debate, outdoor enthusiasts worry that bastions of quiet reflection could be transformed into noisy hubs where visitors yak on cell phones and fidget with electronic tablets, detracting from the ambience of such natural wonders as Yellowstone's celebrated geyser Old Faithful.
Expanding cellular reception may even compromise safety by giving some tourists a false sense of security in the back country, where extremes in weather and terrain test even the most skilled outdoorsman, according to the National Parks Conservation Association.
Tim Stevens, the association's Northern Rockies director, said distractions like meandering moose already challenge the attention of motorists clogging park roads at the height of the summer tourist season.
"People brake in the middle of the road to watch animals. The added distraction of a wireless signal — allowing a driver to text Aunt Madge to say how great the trip is — could have disastrous consequences," he said.
Yellowstone already offers some limited mobile-phone service, afforded by four cellular towers previously erected in developed sections of the park.
But vast swathes of America's oldest national park, which spans nearly 3,500 square miles across the states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, still lack wireless reception in an age dominated by Wi-Fi and iPad users who expect access even in the most remote locations.
Park officials see definite signs that a portion of the roughly 3 million annual visitors to Yellowstone, which crafted a wireless plan in 2008, are finding the lack of cell phone coverage disconcerting.
Park spokesman Al Nash said he routinely fields calls from anxious relatives of Yellowstone visitors unable to contact their loved ones.
"They say, 'My gosh, my niece, daughter or parents went to Yellowstone, and we haven't heard from them for three days,'" he said.




As I told a friend on FB, I carry no phone in the backcountry personally. Mrs Mags is fine with me calling when I am out of the backcountry and back in town. To each their own.


I also admit those of us who cherish being away from connections to the front country are fighting a rear guard battle. The most we can realistically hope for is that people are courteous enough to use their phones similar to going to the bathroom: discreet and in private. Don't want to be at a remote alpine lake and seeing some chooch yelling "GUESS WHERE I AM".

I am a bit of Luddite when it comes to backcountry electronics. No GPS, no phone, no SPOT. Just a personal decision that works for me. I also realize as the years go on, myself and other will be very much in the minority.

[SevenPines]

i really like your podcast Mags!

[Mountain Mike]

I guess I'm an old luddie since I agree with Mags. If you have to rely on GPS & a SPOT for back country travel you shouldn't be out there. Spend your money on a WFA, or a Woofer Course & attend a navigation course. They are plenty of free into courses all over the country for basics.

[leaftye]

I carry a phone just to coordinate a pickup and mail drops. A cheap throwaway phone works for that, and some of them are incredibly light too.

I don't like cellular signals on trails. It encourages people to go where they belong. In the city it results in frequent rescues.

[10-K]

I find having my phone with me very useful. I have 3 children and a business and I don't want to to unreachable should either of them need to contact me. Also, I like to be able to call ahead for reservations, arrange shuttles, and make calls when I'm in town.

My wife demands the SPOT. She's my wife, I love her, and we've been married almost 25 years. If carrying extra 4 ounces makes her happy I'm proud to do it. I'd take it if it weighed a pound because she matters to me.


If Im hiking an area I haven't been in before I like having my GPS with me as well as map(s) of the area. It's a safety thing and I'm a bit geeky.

[RCBear]

Mixed on this one. I carry mine but am perfectly fine if I can't get reception. Parts of the Grand Canyon I do and the parts I don't I realize that an even greater understanding of my situation is required although I try to do the same in areas where I seem to have access. What I don't like is the idea of being miles in to the back country and coming up on a man made structure of that size. Course I don't like the idea of man made shelters either.

[moytoy]

The newest phones are tablets,phones and cameras. The battery life is increasing due to technology and the new screens are 5+ inches making the phone easier to type on. I think the days of finding a computer to use when you go to town are numbered. The problem of course is that users are not always courteous. Education will help but there are always going to be people who don't care about your wishes and will blast away on the phone, the boombox or whatever suits them.

[bear bag hanger]

I don't mind people using their cell phones as long as they are courteous about it. My main complaint is when the telecommunications companies insist the parks pay for their towers, etc. If the telecommunications companies want their towers in the back country, then they should be the ones to pay for them, not our national park systems.

[Son Driven]

Pondering, a couple months ago I was debating if I should take my Ipad or not. Since then I have developed a rebellion against technology. Now I am debating about taking my cell phone. Now I am thinking, I will take my cell phone, however Sunday use only, since I am planning on making Sunaday's zero days. Being 56 years old I think my joints and muscles will need a day to recover every week.

[BirdBrain]

We just hope to be able to send a text message a couple times a day to let our spouses know a tick or black fly hasn't killed us yet. To each their own. I could care less about any other cell phone function while on the trail. It would be nice to send a message that says, "we are fine... at such and such place... send sunny weather".

[leaftye]

We just hope to be able to send a text message a couple times a day to let our spouses know a tick or black fly hasn't killed us yet. To each their own. I could care less about any other cell phone function while on the trail. It would be nice to send a message that says, "we are fine... at such and such place... send sunny weather".

That's actually how I use my phone. It works over a weaker signal. There's no need to repeat myself. It's quiet. It also creates a record for both parties.

[nitewalker]

todays cell phone is made on steroids. these little devices are so versatile that u can use em for just about anything you can dream of. they are becoming the #1 choice as a camera option for most of the country. they can be used for music player, internet, texting, calling, calculating, maping,calendar,gps, flashlight and much more. i belive some cell coverage in the mtns would be okay in some areas. they just need to pick and choose decent locations so that it satisfies most people. if the cell companies are for this then they shoulkd foot the bill not the national parks....

[soulrebel]

When I went on my thru-hike, I didn't take my cellphone, and got on the internet maybe once a month for about two minutes to check the weather. I work with technology and losing it is fine by me.

Currently, I always take my cellphone and backup battery charger, wall-charger, car-charger, usb cable, small speakers, and sometimes a GPS (I do leave the trails and go on adventures). It's a whole nother ditty bag of e-gear, it's heavy, and it can be a distraction. I usually leave it in airplane mode, but I try to check messages at lunch or dinner for the day. I generally don't send messages to anyone or respond in the woods, because I don't want anyone worrying about me, if I don't check in...My wife and I, go by "No news is good news." We do like to do final safe arrival messages when we arrive and leave trailheads, but no bigge if not done.

Bottom line, I've got a wife, a kids, aging parentals/in-laws, pets, and a house on my docket. If I didn't, I might have more of a choice as i did in my younger years. Talk about technology, what happened to the stick and handkerchief method of travel?

[RockDoc]

I think that National Parks should look to Baxter State Park as an example of a natural setting that has been set aside permanently for quiet nature enjoyment and study, rather than the increasingly loud crass noise and nonsense that fills modern life.

Roads are not paved, car access, parking, and camping are limited, there's no electricity, and cell phones ("yell phones") are prohibited.

It is beautifully peaceful and we need more refuges like this.

[RockDoc]

I thought it was cute how Shenandoah Park had yanked all the public phones out of the few developed areas, since of course everyone has their own phone now. But there's no signal in most of Shenandoah! If you really need to make a call we found that employees were good about allowing use of their office phones, but it obviously limits calls to emergencies which is the way it should be in a public natural area IMO.

[kayak karl]

i don't have a problem. if there is a person on their cell near me in the woods, obviously I'M not deep enough in the woods.

[Slo-go'en]

We just hope to be able to send a text message a couple times a day to let our spouses know a tick or black fly hasn't killed us yet. To each their own. I could care less about any other cell phone function while on the trail. It would be nice to send a message that says, "we are fine... at such and such place... send sunny weather".

Your best bet is to try and do it from the top of a mountain in Maine. Coverage is still very spotty and limited along the AT in Maine. You need to be line of sight to one of the few towns along the trail with cell service. Couple times a day? How about every couple of days?

[Wise Old Owl]

KK and Mags I agree - but it is a loosing battle - like kids with violent video games.... what next... I walked past a large group of boys sitting in their tents,,, they all had game boys... the dads were cooking... I took one look and moved on...yea it sucks.

[Papa D]

I have a wife and kid who trust me and I hike in part to be off the grid - cell phone usually stays in the car on short trips - 3-5 days - - I prefer no contact - - especially in wilderness areas - - - on long AT hikes, I do take one though - I keep it powered-off. It's only use is when I get to a town to check in with the family. I really dislike cell-phone conversations in shelters - it totally dumbs down the experience.

[Odd Man Out]

...these little devices are so versatile that u can use em for just about anything you can dream of. they are becoming the #1 choice as a camera option for most of the country. they can be used for music player, internet, texting, calling, calculating, maping,calendar,gps, flashlight and much more...

Jack of all trades, master of none. When it comes to most of these applications, smart phones are inferior to other devices. Sure, multi-use equipment is part UL backpacking strategy, but the lightest equipment is the stuff you don't take. Just because it can do all those things, do you really NEED those things? You don't NEED a camera, music, internet, texting, phones, a calculator or GPS. You might need a map and a flashlight, but other options are cheaper and better.

How often have you heard the question "Can you hike the xyz trail without a GPS?". What you should really ask is "I know that people have been traveling long distance by foot for tens of thousands of years without GPS, and people originally mapped these mountains by dragging a surveyors chain and compass over trackless wilderness without GPS, but because I have chosen not to learn how to navigate for myself, do I have to take a GPS?". And why on earth do you need a cell phone for a calculator??? Our High School international exchange student did all of her AP Chemistry calculations with a pencil and paper or in her head (even logarithms!). How many of us have also chosen to not learn arithmetic? Sure these things can do "anything you can dream of", but for most people, they are used to think small instead of dream big.

I have always had a soft spot in my heart for examples of when low-tech outperforms high tech. The avatar for my posts currently is a close-up of my Christmas present to myself - a Yomud carpet from Turkmenistan. It's small, only 15 sq feet, but the pile is made from over 400,000 wool threads, each knotted to the warp by hand. It is the exact same technology that has been used for thousands of years and it is not something that can be duplicated by a machine. Plus it is a work of art.

By the way, our exchange student and the guy who invented arithmetic and algebra were also from Turkmenistan.