Should the national parks have greater cellphone coverage?/PEER
Should the National Park Service work to see 4G coverage extended to as much of the National Park System as possible? Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility doesn't believe that should happen, and is behind a petition drive to have that idea spiked before we find visitors experiencing the parks in the palms of their hands, and not by using all their senses.
"Our national parks are on the cusp of being wired for streaming videos, music downloads and on-line games for visitor-subscribers to extend 4G (4th Generation) coverage into parks such as Yellowstone. These developments will allow visitors ' particularly young people ' to experience our parks not through their eyes but with noses buried in their electronic devices," PEER says in pushing its petition drive.
"The proliferation of this cyber-infrastructure in our parks means more, ugly cell towers marring vistas, 'spill-over' coverage in wilderness and backcountry and the loss of solitude ' being disconnected from the electronic tendrils of the modern world. Do not further 'Disney-fy' our national parks. Disconnect the devices and reconnect with nature."
The petition is to be sent to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell. PEER hopes to get 15,000 signatures. As of mid-day Friday, it had 63.
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
Wired or not, my boys are not allowed to use their mobile devices in the parks (except when hanging out in our room/cabin).
A horrible intrusion changing the whole experience by users and those around them. A degrading effect noticed even in many very remote locations where many go to reconnect with themselves rather than technology. So disheartening to witness.
A couple of days ago I was in Congaree National Park. There is hardly any cell phone service there. It would have been nice, hiking on the trails, had we been able to access information about some of the plants and trees we were seeing and maybe a more in depth history of the park, while we were on the trails and taking breaks. There was one particularly giant tree I was very interested in, having never seen one that size, but I was out of luck. And the visitor center didn't provide much more information. Imagine all I could have learned while walking those trails!
The assumption that all cell/data service will be used for " streaming videos, music downloads and on-line games" is ridiculous. And if one wants to disconnect "from the electronic tendrils of the modern world" one simply has to turn off their own phone.
Having access to greater amounts of information while visiting a National Park enhances my use of the park; it doesn't diminish it. It is easier to fall in love with something when you know it. Cell/data service can provide that knowledge where the park visitor centers fail. Unless of course, one can carry a seasoned ranger with them.
More than likely that was a loblolly pine, Dahkota. Those are very impressive in Congaree and make up most of the tallest trees.
I do use an app from the audubon bird song/identification app, and a wildflower app that I have on my phone that works when I am not connected to the internet. They definitely aid in identifying what you are staring at, but you have to download the information before you go. I also use the peakfinder app when i'm trying to identify some peak way out in the distance, and that's just based on GPS and doesn't require coverage. The GPS co-located 3d terrain map apps can be more useful in plotting a route through a trail-less wilderness than a topo, especially when you get into an area and something captures your attention and you want to spend some time exploring. But, of course it's dependent on how much battery power you have, however you can always buy batteries to take with you to keep your phone charged.. I recently used a gps map on a trip in the rockies where we went off trail quite a bit, and there were not any cell towers within many many many miles. But the phone was very useful because it shows you exactly where you are in the trailless terrain.
I personally don't want to see towers all over our National Parks and that's one of the reasons I think wilderness act applied to parks like Yellowstone and Grand Canyon is a necessity, but on the same token I can still utilize my phone for other things, especially in regards to information. People used to have to haul 5 books, topos, etc for information that can now be stored on a little handheld device. If i'm on a long multi-day trek, I do find an occasional delight is playing a documentary that I downloaded to my phone. Plus, it's not going to be long before cell towers are a thing of the past, and satellite technology is the norm. So, I see cell towers as a temporary thing, that will be gone in 20 to 30 years. I believe the government should think very hard before they pave trails into what could be wilderness to plop towers everywhere just for "security". And, on the same token, when it's 8:00 pm, pitch black, and youre in the wilderness, letting your little one watch stored cartoons or listen to music on an iphone in the tent isn't necessarily destroying his/her experience and those things add to their enjoyment. And it doesn't seem to affect his ability to spot EVERY little thing on a trail. So, on the same token, I don't necessarily jive with the philosphical beliefs of the "purists". I think it adds to the fun factor of kids to be able to relax and play a game in a tent, especially if you are on a multi-day excursion where there is some down time. And you don't have to be "wired" to experience those things..
Having taken many families and individuals into one of the 7 Natural Wonders of the World and seen the very positive transformations that kids (and adults) experience connecting to real as opposed to virtual, this is a very bad idea, seriously! Very addictive this technology and goes against everything these Parks have meant to generations before. NPS is selling their soul if they let this happen in the National Parks any farther than it already has. We all need more real engagement and not this BS virtual, I believe.
Gary, it wasn't the loblolly, though the ones there are impressive; this was a deciduous tree, with ovoid serrated leaves, a grayish trunk.
I'm not saying that towers and access have to extend deep into the wilderness - in fact, I would be completely against that. However, I see no reason for there not to be access in the front country areas, within a mile or two of the roads and visitor centers, where 95% of visitors go. The visitor centers provide some information but it is generally soundbites. I wish for more detailed information. I would talk to an interpretive ranger to get that information but, in parks such as GSMNP, they are woefully understaffed.
Lots of factors influence our opinions on this subject, but there's little doubt cell phones have become a very big deal for many people today. A term has even been coined for the fear of being out of contact by cell phone. It's called "nomophobia" (short for "no-mobile-phone phobia"), and some researchers now claim it's gotten so prevalent that "Fear of not having a working cell phone should be added to psychiatry’s diagnostic manual."
This article about "smartphone addiction" says, "In a national survey conducted in the fall of 2013, 63% of respondents said they check their phone for messages or calls once an hour, while 9% said they checked their phone every five minutes. An additional 63% said they would be upset if they left home without their smartphone. Many would return home to retrieve it, even if they're out on just a quick trip to the store."
Whether or not we like the idea of expanded cell service, information such as the above suggests it will be a tough battle for the NPS to resist pressure to expand wireless service into more and more areas. Today's Traveler article about a possible project at Yellowstone is likely just the first of many such proposals.
My wife takes hikes in nearby bear country several times a week. She thinks it is a nuisance when I remind her, but I do ask her to carry her phone, just like you put a water bottle or basic first aid supplies in your pack. She is definitely __not__ rocking out to the oldies out there and it disturbs no one for her to have 911 availability.
And we should put guard rails around the Grand Canyon, right? I understand the motivation to keep your wife safe but knowing the dangers and dealing with them is part of a back country experience, unless virtual is more comforting.
Would the NPS have to pay for these sites? I am not sure the cell companies can justify the expense or do we plan on subsidizing them? I do enjoy being out of range, a perk of a national park from my perspective.
Who piddled on your post toasties, trailadvocate? My wife doesn't need water wings or guard rails - I'm just more comfortable if she has a way to call 911 if she needs it. Sheesh - nothing like taking a totally uncalled for pendulum swing on a comment.
Wilderness as such is "on your own." A psych nurse in the real world. No conscience need be present. It's real and a good thing, respectfully. Like the wolves, the bears and any other real being.
Interesting how everybody has an opinion on how others should experience the parks. Frankly, if private companies pay for the increased coverage, I say why not? People who want to get away from it all can leave the cell phone in the car. The majority probably won't.
You should be old enough to know better than insulting those with whom you disagree.
EC got it. Nobody wants to see the landscape scarred with a bunch of wires strung up to cell towers in the backcountry. Otherwise, who cares? If you want to get away from it all, just hike in the backcountry where it's empty, leave your cell phone, and hope you don't fall.
Well, Zeb, to define my reasoning a bit more I will admit my guiding years became such an unexpected joy being a part of so many transformations and positive results from the adventures. Don't think I ever felt so rewarded, for the most part, getting out of the way of people really making positive changes to attitudes and growth, especially with youth who are being set up for a lifetime based on these experiences. Technology in the doses that are being injected today, stand in the way. I can go for days without even seeing a human foot print but am disappointed when I do run into folks into their technology and not present enough to share the wildness. Okay, I'm done.
Zeb and Rick, I am with you on this one, as long as it doesnt involve towers and sheds in the backcountry.
You might check with some backcountry rangers on how attitudes have negativly changed where cell service is discovered by those addicted to connectivity. A very large cell tower inside Grand Canyon NP and just 400 yards from the Rim has changed things dramatically in the inner Canyon. "Hey Joe, you'll never guess where I am."
I'd still be happy if cell phones were never invented, primarily due to users being oblivious to what I think is just common curtesy when using them. That said, I'm pretty sure they are here to stay (a guy can always dream though) and ready to give up the fight. I have the impression that there is pretty widespread coverage in the parks already so don't see that it will make much difference. One concern is the added feeling of safety that could pose a problem. I'll just call for help when I get lost, hungry, tired etc. instead of making sure one's prepared. I suspect that may be one of the unintended results. Like others have mentioned, keep the towers as discrete as possible.
Actually, that is one of the problem with cell phones coverage in that it can give people that extra sense of "security" that if they get into trouble, they can use their phones so they go into places that are above their capabilities or were'nt properly prepared. There have been many cases where people that are way out of their league are getting into trouble, but because their cell phone had a single bar they were able to call out and get a rescue. Granted, there are still some places in the lower 48 where those rules still don't apply, and let's hope it stays that way. Frank Church and the Great Bear come to mind.
Well, trailadvocate, at least this morning you sound a bit more coherent. Last night your posts sounded a bit like too much of trailguide lubrication consumed. It really sounded like you were sitting around the high school locker room clanging them together to tell everyone else how much more outdoorsier you were. Anything that gets Eric, Zeb, and I in agreement is fairly beyond the pale.
As I see it, the biggest and worstest problem with cell phones is the fact that so many people seem to think they must shout loud enough for the person on the other end of the call to hear them even without the phone.
I have to admit that the last time I was waiting for Old Faithful and had a guy next to me who was shouting loud enough for his friend in New York to hear him (with frequent use of a short word that starts with the sixth letter of the alphabet) I found myself seriously considering having an "accident" with my bear spray.
Yellowstone is a big place. Don't like the guy next to you - move.
BTW - Did you come up with any of those "vague Constitution" citations yet? I suppose we will have to wait for those along with the list of people that want to elminated all public lands and the half dozen other unsubstantiated claims you have made.
Trailguide, I can appreciate your morning perspective, and I can see how a few idiots will have zero manners if they have a cell signal. But ultimately, it sure sounds like your problem that others decide to engross themselves in their cell phone rather than the landscape. In other words, you want people to enjoy the parks the way you enjoy them. That does not seem very American to me.
Personnally, I don't really care how others decide to enjoy their surroundings, and I don't like others deciding for me (so long as said enjoyment does not impact others, etc.).
Zeb, others decide on a daily basis how you should enjoy whatever. Part of the new tolerance.:). What I know for a fact is that people are getting disconnected from very meaningful and strengthening experiences that I've witnessed by technology addiction. Real verses virtual. Alarming, really, and seeing the evidence of change to detachment in previously remote and special places can not be good. Exactly similar to some industrial park built on a pristine landscape.
BTW:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/05/children-cyberbullying-se...