[at-l] Cellphones Not Required

[RoksnRoots@aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

In a message dated 1/31/02 2:38:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, DTimm65344 
writes:


> I carry the cell phone for emergencies and to inform the family in two 
> minute increments periodically that I am fine, period.  I have a number of 
> friends and family that have them surgically attached to their ears, but 
> I'm not much into chit chat even off the trail.
> 


   *** I'm not criticizing you in particular, but if you analyze the 
logistics of this you'll see it doesn't make much difference. Unless you have 
a set time or interval at which you check in your family can't do much 
anyway. In the worst scenario where you fail to make contact your family will 
call emergency officials and they will be forced to initiate a search. This 
inherently makes the Trail less wild by making you dependent on outside 
support. On-Trail, the hiker network makes up for this. You need only look to 
New Hampshire where the increase in cellphone originated emergency calls lead 
to a "fool's surcharge" being imposed. Police have seen an explosion in 
frivolous reports also. This creates a rise in costs for covering all these 
calls. 

    On the Trail the reality is that you are probably already dead anyway if 
you met the worst fate. Acts of violence would be long over before they 
figured out how to get there. The only people phones would help would be solo 
incapacitated hikers in low season far from help or off trail. I can't 
remember ever hearing of such a fatality before cellphones. This brings to 
bear the question of cost to the Trail's wilderness vs actual benefit. To 
keep the Trail wild I would elect to go unconnected. You can easily plan 
calls from towns and remote phone access... 



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---