Connected on the trail

My wife wants an update once a day and I don't think that's too much to ask. I usually have spotty coverage at best and it's only when I'm on top of a peak that I can sneak out a text and let her know everything is ok. It's also nice for me to know that things are ok at home and that my wife and kids are doing well.

We've debated getting a satellite based device and I probably will once I start taking the kids out backpacking. For now it's just me and I've got great life insurance. :)

…

That's pretty depressing Roger.
But look on the bright side… they'll grow up glued to a screen, get old with their eyes glued to a screen, and, hopefully not come out to the wilderness with their gadget additions to screw up the wilderness for the rest of us, and then they'll die in front of a screen… or inside a hologram or some such nonsense… but the wilderness will be spared them.

Billy

"We've debated getting a satellite based device and I probably will once I start taking the kids out backpacking. For now it's just me and I've got great life insurance. :)"

Get a Spot Gen3 and don't take a smart phone or a GPS or any other electronics. Peace of mind without the bells and whistles… literally. Just a few flashing diodes, and you turn it off at the end of the day.

Interesting, related article.

The sheer terror of being alone with our thoughts

A pet peeve of mine is not so much what a lot of people talk about, and how much people talk while hiking, though I'm often very peevish about those issues as well. The thing that make me extra annoyed around a lot of people is the entirely baffling phenomenon of people raising their voices, sometime to a shout. I see two people talking while standing or walking perhaps 3 feet from each other, and they are 40 feet from me. This means the amplitude of the sound waves they hear are actually 178 times as large as the ones I am hearing. Since the human hearing sensory apparatus responds more like the log of this, what the person next to them hears should sound more than 5 times louder that what I am hearing.

And yet my ears are bleeding.

Why do people talk louder in the outdoors? Its quieter there – shouldn't they be speaking more softly without all the interference?

Though I agree that a person talking, AND on a cellphone, AND arguing loudly, AND being an inane twit, all at the same time might sorely temp me to do some damage with my titanium spork as I walk by.

Doug, I have a copy of Pascal's Pensees on my iphone when I backpack 'cause I love quotes just like the one referred to in the article. Come to think about, that makes me a bit of a techno-twit as well – but at least a quiet, unobtrusive twit.

Yes, indeedie, Doug…

I love and seek out the silence and love to be solo.

And often marvel at how afraid most people are of that.

And have come to similar conclusions as those expressed in the article you reference.

I once went to a Silent Retreat in which a couple of hundred people spent a week together… in silence. As in, no talking whatsoever. No notes, no sign language, no radios, no computers, no phones. It was an amazing experience.

Billy

When people talk loud on the outdoors is usually within a group. It is not so much the being outdoors but being a group. People fight for talking slots and tend to speak louder and louder.

deleted

It is a more connected world and there's nothing to be done about it, … except maybe camp in a valley with no reception while sharing ridge-line photos with the world once there's reception. The high points I seek, usually the howl of the wind drowns out any sort of voice.

+1 RoGW.

When I was 15 my parents dropped me and my buddy for a week long backpack trip in the Oregon Cascades to hike the PCT, no technology except a compass so we would know which way the highway was if we got turned around….

I highly recommend to all these technology addicted people to get UNconnected next time you go out and experience the world without the technology. You will find it insanely liberating, and its not nearly as scary as you seem to think.

High Tech world or not, some of these people should read the Wilderness Act of 1964 http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/legisAct.

And I quote Section 2.c.(2) "has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation;"

Solitude? Primitive? I don't think chatting on a cell phone, downloading Netflix, texting your every move to people quite fits the intended purpose…what about the rest of us? I feel like a non-smoker snorting lungfulls of 2nd hand smoke…..

I hope I miss ya on the trail.

IMHO,

As long as it's out of sight, out of earshot, and therefore out of mind, I'm willing to cut someone slack realizing if they are looking for a signal they aren't hiking. Another limitation is battery life. Constantly roaming for a signal will kill a battery, even just reception for GPS and all the solar, mechanical, fire,etc… add to pack weight. One gadget hound I hike with every so often has an excellent mapping program loaded into his iPad mini but using it to solve an actual problem drains the battery quickly. Not sure about the texting the "kids" thru-hiking the PCT are doing. Great for coordination but then the trail gets ignored.

Of course the flip side to not paying attention is some I've known who listen to podcasts (over earbuds) have been shown rattlesnakes they've come dangerously close to … and weren't struck by since the rattler didn't feel like it.

Racing to get help would definitely impede my wilderness experience if they were in my hiking party.

And then there’s goTenna

…

"1 cracked screen means no phone, no gps, no music, no eBooks, no alarm clock, no camera."

It just means cut up fingers….:P

I carry an iPhone because it's my GPS, my camera, my reader, and my phone home when the trip ends. While on the trail though the phone is on airplane mode and I stay blissfully ignorant of anything and everything that's going on in the world. Which, for anyone who's reconnected after a long trip, usually turns out to be nothing.

I find that, normally, nothing happens while I'm gone. The news stories are still the same, the goings on at home are still the same, and nobody solved the problems at work that I hoped would be taken care of by the time I got back.

I think the risk of missing some major event while in the wilderness is close to zero, but the risk of missing the wilderness by trying to stay connected is close to 100%.

> Battery life will double every two years.
Dream on!!!!!
It won't. Moores law does not apply to batteries – as every mfr has found out.

> Handheld devices will take a leap in technology and act as Satellite phones,
You need a LOT more power to reach a satellite than a cell phone. And power means battery, and battery means weight. You can get hand-help sat phones now, but they will never shrink to the size of a mobile phone (laws of physics).

I don't mind what gear you carry out walking, as long as you do not intrude on me.

Cheers

From a PCT blog –

"At 5 p.m. we get a text from xxxx, at the Klum campground next to the resevoir. Making dinner. Free showers, she says. It’s a few miles away, and a third of a mile off trail … Should we camp at Klum? I text the others. They’re not very far behind …

"Solitude? Primitive? I don't think chatting on a cell phone, downloading Netflix, texting your every move to people quite fits the intended purpose…what about the rest of us? I feel like a non-smoker snorting lungfulls of 2nd hand smoke….."

Where the hell are you guys backpacking where you can download netflix and text people???? Central Park????

"Rather than buy an 'security' devices why not take a wilderness medicine course."

"Before I was out of high school our parents would drop us off at the trail head, saying 'be careful, have fun and we'll see ya in a week.' We had no phone, no SPOT and were fine everytime. Nothing has changed since then only the irrational fear that something will go wrong and we 'need' a 'Rescue-me-now' button to push. The risks on the trail in no way have increased, so why has the amount of safety gear people take have. Pack your knowledge people, not your fears."

So what? Why not carry a PLB if you have it. It increases your safety for 5 ounces. How many of the deaths out there in the wilderness could have been prevented had someone had a rescue beacon, probably a decent amount… like the guy who broke his leg and almost died on mt goddard recently.
Why not have the skills and safety but also have a PLB? Why does it have to be an either or situation?
I carry a PLB for the same reason I carry emergency firestarter, things happen. Not carrying an emergency item that takes minimal weight because of some odd principle against it is just silly. That's rational. Carrying a 10 pound mountaineering tent and a 0 degree bag into the sierras in summer is irrationally packing your fears, packing a 5 ounce rescue device is not.

"Where the hell are you guys backpacking where you can download netflix and text people???? Central Park????"

That's what I keep thinking! I'm sure conditions vary based on where you hike, but where I hike "wilderness" means just that. Your'e not getting cell service unless you climb up to the summit of a tall peak with a lot of prominence. And then, maybe. I think the article probably applies more to thru hikers where trails do go in and out of areas where there is cell coverage. I've never come across anyone talking on a cell phone in the backcountry.

"Rather than buy an 'security' devices why not take a wilderness medicine course. Rather than take a phone to update your sig other why not educate them that wilderness is not a scary place and it will not eat you up the first chance it gets. A person has a better chance of winning the lotto than they do getting injured in the backcountry and not be able to rescue them selves."

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/recovery-efforts-halted-teacher-s-body-remains-in-wilderness

Kind of hard to convince my wife that there's no chance it could happen to me when it happened to this guy in an area I go to all the time. I'll be heading up there in about 6 hours.

Self rescue when solo means something different then a with a partner or a group. Even with a partner you may not be able to self rescue. Rog, you know what the Winds is like. I've been there solo and last year I went with a partner. It's pretty common there to go off trail and we did in some fairly rugged terrain. If your partner breaks his leg/ankle, or has some other freak accident, you're not going to construct a stretcher out of your tarp and trekking poles and drag them out 30 miles. Sure you can get them as comfortable as possible and go for help, which is going to take 1-2 days and then drive hours to get into cell range. A device for summoning help makes perfect sense to me. Oh, and even on trail, we didn't see anyone else for 5 days so help wasn't just going to pop by any minute.

"I highly recommend to all these technology addicted people to get UNconnected next time you go out and experience the world without the technology. You will find it insanely liberating, and its not nearly as scary as you seem to think. "

Stop with insults all ready Kerry. Carrying or using a piece of technology does not make one technology addicted. (You must be technology addicted, after all you are using a device and the internet to post on this forum.) Nobody is scared. If I was scared, I'd forgo going solo and only hike with a partner, don't you think? Try and make your point without being demeaning to others.

"I hope I miss ya on the trail."

Not as much as I do. And you definitely will. I don't go anywhere like what you describe.

"Where the hell are you guys backpacking where you can download netflix and text people???? Central Park????"

It's hard to find a hike in Indiana where you're more than five miles from a road. I have a cell signal about 75% of the time. Not that I personally use it, but it's there.

We don't all have the luxury of getting out to the boonies on a regular basis.

Here's an interesting twist on the whole PLB/Spot thing…

When I take off for a trip be it solo or with friends, for a day or a week, she has some very generous conditions:

1) Leave a plan. I let her know where I am going and print out a copy of the map as well. Usually I leave contact info (local ranger office and sheriff dept)

2) When I am back in cell range, give her a call to let her know if everything is OK (and I usually get a "Honey Do" list in the process! Ha!)

Now the twist….

My darling wife grew up on the Polish / German border. The part of the world that has gone back and fort many times in the past..well 500+ years! :)

She also had the good "fortune" to grow up at a time when having the wrong accent made you suspicious and that the government monitoring all your movements (along with neighbors being encourage to report your movements) was the norm.

What does all this crap mean? She takes a jaundiced eye towards any kind of tracking device.

For various reasons, I am the same way.

Perhaps it is being irresponsible. Maybe.

But I tend to be more conservative when solo in terms of technical pursuits. And I'd hate to think we are getting to the point that someone is considered irresponsible just because they choose not to be connected. I realize a PLB is fairly innocuous. But as technology matures, improves and is more accessible overall, will someone be considered reckless because they choose to eschew two-way communication? To be reachable only when back in town?

I realize I am perhaps a bit of Luddite at the "advanced" age of 40.

But I like the fact that I can still go to places and truly get away.

For now.

In 2025? "Paul, we tried reaching this weekend. Why did you not answer your iPhone 10s with built in satellite technology??? " (I exaggerate, but you get the idea!)

Based on this thread, and other others like it, perhaps this societal and cultural expectation of being connected 24/7 is not that far off. Arguably it is now for non-outdoor pursuits.

Where I live cell phones in the wilderness are pretty much a non-issue. It's more rare to actually have cell phone service than it is to be out of the reception area. My girlfriend and I don't even own cell phones anymore.

Yeah, I find it slightly annoying to see friends checking their phones every 15 minutes to see if they have reception so they can send a text, or check their e-mail, but it's their lives so, meh. I just ignore it. Generally, the battery will die within a few hours of roaming and by the end of the trip they will generally comment on how nice it was to be away from technology for a while.

Technology is so ingrained into our lives that checking your phone for messages, or e-mails is as much a habit as having a cup of coffee in the morning, or having a smoke (if you are a smoker). I bet most people don't even conciously realize they are doing it.

Personally, I'm more bothered by cell phone use when i'm in civilization. Last time I was in Calgary we were at a restaurant and I saw a table of 12 people, all of whom had their cell phones out and were staring at them in unison like zombies. All of them oblivious to what was going on around them. I wanted so badly to take a picture of it, but alas, I didn't have a cell phone with me.

Cheers…

I spent days and weeks in the woods unconnected when I was young, for fun and work. But at 64, while I am very careful when out solo, my wife's peace of mind in worth carrying a Spot. She loves to hike, but currently she can't backpack, so she enjoys following me on the map and imagining what it is like. And if I have some signal I send her pictures of the things she would like to see. Do I love being sure that the battery is still functional in either device? No, but it's a small price to pay for my wife's happiness. As Justin has suggested I don't think of technology as an either/or proposition. I also don't think of it as ruining my walk in the wild. That feeling would be more about my own attitude than the technology itself.