Do Electronics Really Belong in the Wilderness ? !

Nvm

Jumping in late… My two cents — two things that don't belong in the wilderness:

1. Anything that interferes with safety and reasonable enjoyment of peace and quiet.

2. An attitude at odds with HYOH. It really isn't any of my business whether people use their electronic gadgets out in the wild or not.

Sorry to link to my site again, but I am lazy…

I wrote this last week. I think it is a good compromise
http://www.pmags.com/backcountry-mobile-device-etiquette

"I think the major difference in topics such as this is that people look at how something like this would affect themselves personally instead of wilderness as its own being and what is best for it (humans and individuals aside)."

Ah, but then you'd really have to broaden the discussion. I'd posit that the simple fact you buy electronics (which means they'll continue to be produced) does much more harm to wilderness that the act of carrying that electronic with you into the wilderness. What's really best for sustained wilderness is stopping, even reversing, technological advancement and childrearing. Ah, lint. Excuse me while I pick that out….

My best answer to the OP is "it depends". I'd add a related question — is the answer different for designated wilderness than it is for back country in general? (I think not.)

Doesn't matter — there are several items where being electronic is irrelevant. For example, I cannot see any experiential difference between taking a battery-powered watch and taking a mechanically powered watch. There are a number of such examples, and in each case my reaction is "who cares?"

Wrong because it impairs safety — if failure of the electronic device would cause a material safety problem, then you are wrong to depend on it. One of the most obvious examples is dependency on a GPS and then either getting beyond where you would be safe with a map and compass or else just not bringing a map and compass. There are other similar examples. I say that you are wrong to do such a thing. You can argue that safety is your own business, but that is debatable — the issue is that society will feel the need to rescue you if you get into trouble. Aside from that being costly, it can risk others' lives and it can create public backlash that may affect all of us ("Why do we let these idiots do such things?")

Wrong when it interferes with others' wilderness experience — one obvious example is when your electronic device is making noise that others (who do not want to hear it) can hear. You are wrong — you have no right to do so. Use ear buds, or turn it off when around those who do not want to hear it.

Otherwise, it is your own business — as long as you are not being unsafe, not impacting the wilderness itself, and not impacting my wilderness experience I cannot get too upset. I may have various other reactions, but I cannot really say that you are wrong. You may be doing it in a way I would not, or you may be being rude to the group you are with, but that is just you being you.

(I have deliberately avoided the question of which electronic devices interfere with actually getting a full wilderness experience. That, it seems to me, is up to each individual.)

–MV

"So with that, I see almost no reason (theoretically) why electronics should belong in the wilderness."

So… can I have your headlamp?

"Now you'll find almost no one that doesn't say you should take a sat phones/SPOT/PLBs etc. But I don't think they are exempt from anything else. If you envision yourself getting into a scenario where it would actually be needed maybe you have to re-evaluate your plan or develop further skills, like solid judgment and decision making."

Er… If I took this advice, I'd probably never step out of the house. You carry emergency "ocrap" devices not for the scenarios you can think of, but for the ones you can't think of. You can never mitigate 100% of the risk through forethought or training.

I also don't like the idea that every person who needs help is someone who lacks judgement and decision making skills. Sometimes bad stuff just happens.

"but at least start by defining your parameters"

Is it useful?
Do I enjoy it?
Does it somehow impose on the wilderness experience of others?

If the answers are Yes, and/or yes, and no, then I bring it regardless if it requires batteries or not.

I typically use my iPhone as a GPS, camera, and e-reader. I've returned to the Steripen for water treatment. I think a headlamp is a pretty smart thing to bring.

I don't care if other people watch movies or listen to music on their headphones in the back country, I just don't care to. Maybe that will change when I can start doing multi week hikes but for anything under a week (which is the max I do now), I never feel like I need either. I used to bring headphones but stopped after I realized that I never use them. I really love good music so that's saying a lot that the wilderness more than replaces it.

To me it depends on the electronics.

I don't bring electronics for entertainment purposes. I don't listen to music or play games or watch stuff on a screen when I'm in the wilderness.

I do bring electronics for safety. I might have my phone (turned off except for emergency), possibly a PLB, and possibly a GPS. And lest I be bashed about the GPS, I have been weathered into areas with fog and snow where I could not see landmarks and I have gotten lost because of that. I also go into areas where it's very flat or and there are no landmarks to use,or so heavily treed that landmarks can't be seen. I do rely on map and compass when I can, but I feel no shame at all on using a GPS when needed. I also get a kick out of having the GPS map my routes so that I can download that information on returning home and save it for future reference.

to clarify a bit ….

yes I deliberately worded the original post so that it would be slightly vague and open, let responders decide how they want to respond and all that.

but it was sort of my assumption that BPLers would be wilderness conscious and thoughtful of others , however if you want to go there fine.

to those who suggested this is a fastpack rehash, no its not really, as many on this site say, UL does not mean simply going fast.

to those who responded with why not, if it makes things easier and more comfortable, well I guess this was the gist of my question.
do you Ever want to remove yourself from the trappings of modern civilization ?
if you don't that's fine.
yes its ok to bring the kitchen sink into the wilderness if that's what you want, HYOH and all that.
but the wilderness is out there to provide you an opportunity to visit a different side of yourself for a short period. how far are you willing to go ?
I would suggest to some (not those who have responsibilities to others) that you even go out there without telling a soul where you are going, and no SPOT or other link back. its truly all on you.

what I find a bit comical is this subtle competition to go UL and even SUL, minimizing this and that, and yet that reluctance to cut the truly modern cords, the electronic connections to society.

so again, I guess the gist of my question is :
how far are you willing to go ?
and how do you define that ?
do you leave a rain jacket home to save weight and bring your iphone, or vica versa ?

again … HYOH ….

Tell me about your mother.

Hey, are you the same Art from that book "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"?

But anyway, I do think it's pretty important that you tell us about your mother.

Generally speaking I am not all that interested in forgoing modern technology when heading out into the wilderness. I might take less to test my abilities, but only then. I am going to enjoy the wilderness. Anything that helps me enjoy my time there is something I will consider taking. Playing music interferes with my enjoyment, so I don't do that. Using a GPS does not interfere, so I take that. Surfing the web would interfere so I don't do that, assuming it would even be possible. Reading does not interfere so I sometimes take something to read. Headlamps, etc all help so those types of things go also. And I take a spot when I go solo as required by my wife. It it makes her happy…

Bottom line, YES, I think electronics have a place. The wilderness is not necessarily a test, but something to be enjoyed. Unless you want a test, nothing wrong with that either.

[…]

I would suggest to some (not those who have responsibilities to others) that you even go out there without telling a soul where you are going, and no SPOT or other link back. Its truly all on you.

Responsibility to SAR team?

"I also don't like the idea that every person who needs help is someone who lacks judgement and decision making skills. Sometimes bad stuff just happens."

Yup.

I say to each his own. I have 50 years of backpacking experience and never had a problem. Until 2014. Last year while on a hike in a remote area, I got hurt unexpectedly and hobbled out to a road where there was water. Camped two days rationing food, then decided since the injury was not healing that I'd use the inReach and get help. Got help, got to a doctor and got well and returned to trail. Sheriff who interviewed me for the records said that having and knowing how to use the inReach was the smartest thing he'd seen in over a couple of years of hundreds of rescues that he'd been involved in. He said most people DONT carry PLBs and it's harder on SAR and wastes a ton of their time, money and energies.

So yea it has its place and purpose. I think we're very lucky to have these "luxuries" now. I'm not partial to boom boxes and speakers in the woods though.

"to those who responded with why not, if it makes things easier and more comfortable, well I guess this was the gist of my question.
do you Ever want to remove yourself from the trappings of modern civilization ?"

I work in IT. My entire life is saturated with computers, technology, and the issues they bring about.

I specifically look for vacations and hobbies where I unplug. All my hobbies are decidedly so low-tech that they're practically Luddite. Aside from some video gaming, none of them involve much modern technology at all intentionally. I count backpacking as part of it.

So I do go camping/hiking to "get away from it all". But I'm also honest with myself. Some of those trappings of civilization really do provide for a better quality of life, even out in the sticks. I don't mind using them to enhance my pleasure of the moment or the endeavor. I mean, I have enough discipline to leave the phone in the bag unless I *need* it. I can leave the GPS clipped onto some webbing and not fiddle with it constantly. It's there, I can use it when I need/want it, or I can just let it sit and be there for when I need it. I'm okay with that.

Though I will say that I recently joined a backpacking forum/group thing and… I can see your point. The amount of people who eschew maps, dedicated GPS units, or in one case any kind of lighting system for their cellphone makes me twitch and want to bang my head against the wall.

So in that case, maybe I can hit a middle point. Technology in the sticks should be a spice not a main course. We are addicted to our smartphones to begin with, I don't know if taking that addiction out to the boonies is a good idea or even a particularly enjoyable idea to me.

"do you Ever want to remove yourself from the trappings of modern civilization ?"

My view:
The reason it is called "Wilder… ness" is that the whole idea of it is to have a place to experience the wild again. By definition, I think that means that electronics are in opposition to the concept of "Wilder… ness".

However, I acknowledge that everyone will have their own level of appreciation (or tolerance) of being wild again. And I'm fine with that as long as their gadgets don't take away from my experience of 'the wild'.

Billy

"Anarcho-primitivism is an anarchist critique of the origins and progress of civilization. According to anarcho-primitivism, the shift from hunter-gatherer to agricultural subsistence gave rise to social stratification, coercion, alienation, and population growth. Anarcho-primitivists advocate a return to non-"civilized" ways of life through deindustrialization, abolition of the division of labor or specialization, and abandonment of large-scale organization technologies. Anarcho-primitivists are often distinguished by their focus on the praxis of achieving a feral state of being through "rewilding"."

Seems a bit over dramatized Cameron… wanting to take a break from civilization for a week or two does not make someone an Anarcho-primitivist.

Billy

The link I posted earlier in this thread was about how technology changes our perception of, and relationship to, wilderness. There's something to be said for walking in wild places without a reliance on technology, or allowing technology to distract us from our surroundings.

Do as you please, bring what you want, and don't disturb the solitude of others.

But you may have a different experience, and a greater appreciation for wilderness, if you don't rely on technology for locating and planning a trip, and hike knowing you are responsible for your own wellbeing since you left all the gizmos at home. There can be a greater sense of freedom in the wild when you remove the shackles and restraints imposed by technology.

If you take a picture of a scene. you'll remember the picture, not the actual scene

If you just look at the scene, you'll remember it actually

I wouldn't say one is necesarily better than the other, but it is different

"If you just look at the scene, you'll remember it actually"

Agreed… but for how long :)

I often look at old outdoor pics and had no idea where or why it was taken or what it is.. but that's another story :)

billy

old age is a bitch : )

"I often look at old outdoor pics and had no idea where or why it was taken or what it is.. but that's another story :)"

This one's for you, Billy. ;0)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Xv1tMioGgXI%3Frel%3D0

"As long as it doesn't disturb me or defile the environment or annoy wildlife, I don't give a crap what somebody brings."

This. If anyone is trying to make some kind of point beyond this based on some of school of personal purity/virtue then that is purely your own private business. I tend to be on the minimalist side of things, but I feel people talking about this sort of thing should, at the barest minimum, understand that there are a huge number of reasons people go to the 'wilderness' (better define that term critically and carefully) as well as skill and experience levels. The people on this site aren't even very typical of the "norm" and with all our differences we are still a very fringe minority of what is already a fringe minority of people who "use" the wilderness at all.

Personally I can barely find people I can stand to go with on a week long trip since I'm not into it being primarily a social experience, and like Nick I want the least amount of "stuff" between me and the experience, not more to make me feel less anxious. But I would never deny that the vast majority of people DO think of it this way. As long as they don't intrude too badly on other people's experiences they are free to do as they like. I think the REAL behavioral sins, on both extremes, usually arise from not understanding THAT, and acting accordingly.

Since I was old enough to be conscious of them I've never liked debates that are based on a ethic of purely personal purity, rightness, lifestyle accessory, or whatever, when the important issue have nothing to do with that, IMHO. Wilderness and nature in general do not give a damn about me, let alone my personal purity philosophy, or choices based on that, and 2 seconds after I am dead these ideas become simply ridiculous.

What will matter is if there is any wilderness left and what condition it will be in. Next to that any symbolic behavior is totally unimportant in my view. Even a philosophy of "no extra baggage", if taken to the level of obsession, becomes baggage.