[at-l] Sense of Wilderness and Town Stops (Kahley)

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

In a message dated 3/20/2002 8:52:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, kahley@ptd.net 
writes:


> This whole thread is getting silly.  Jumping from Cphones to RVs is 
> silly.  It's
> become apparent, since no one is condemning radios, that it's a matter of 
> "my
> little tech tool tie to civilization is ok but your's isn't".  If the 
> marginal possibility of a
> expedited rescue is all that your illusion of wilderness hangs on, I am 
> very sorry for you.
> If you don't see that a radio brings more civilization onto the Trail than 
> an unused
> cphone, I don't understand you.
> 

     *** Kahley, I think you'll find that the actual on-Trail experience was 
a lot different than almost all Trail walkers envisioned beforehand. When you 
say, "I think I can keep clean enough while on the Trail", it makes me 
snicker and say many will probably discourage you from saying that.    

      What is silly is forming a Trail consensus from chat room tempest in a 
teapot contests rather than long term views derived from greater histories. 
To reduce some Trail supporters views to being worried how fast some get 
rescued is a rather unjust rendering of what was striven to be explained by 
people who held deep views about what the Trail means. What is equally 
perplexing is how you have now become a staunch anti-radio wilderness purist 
in your approval of cell phone use on the AT. Do you see a conflict between 
using wilderness sensitivity to reject radios while you are arguing for 
taking a cell phone into a place that is supposed to be remote and detached? 
Besides, the difference between a radio and cell phone was explained before 
-did you ignore that? 

       My use of my radio was usually for 10 minutes to a half hour at night 
to listen for weather forecasts, baseball games or music. Most of the time I 
ended up crashing right into sleep because I was so tired and dark was not 
very useful to be awake in when hiking long hours every day. My morning use 
was just to get weather reports in order to plan the best schedule or 
destination according to the weather. For instance, if I found that a deep 
Low pressure was going to rain hard the next day I would probably plan a 
longer day that day etc. There are those (like you know who) who advise to 
not even bring a radio at all. I suppose the all day rain they walk in *is* 
more of a wilderness experience and I defer to them. Only one time did I try 
walking with the radio on and found it too staticky and awkward. I have seen 
many through-hikers wearing that headphone type outdoors radio while hiking 
too. 

     I equally don't understand people who come to a wilderness Trail and try 
to impose their casual outlook on it without having a knowledge or respect of 
it's historic or (here we go) "traditional" purpose. I was once told that I 
would never change AT-L and shouldn't try and I had nerve trying to come in 
and impose my will on its members. Funny how I look at the AT the same way 
when it comes to these issues. The pro-Cphone arguments sound best when 
divorced from the Trail's recorded wilderness mission as listed in the ATC 
definition. A game of seeking the flaws in wilderness defenders' arguments 
rather than upholding a fragile responsibility the Trail expects us to keep. 
Lowland thinking... 


      A radio is *passive*. People sitting out in their homes would never 
know I was listening to a country preacher or local music for regional flavor 
while in the shelter. A cell phone tells people you are out on the Trail and 
the Trail has come to them. You could even call Breen for goodness sake and 
order a condo from an AT cell phone. Wilderness is also something no one at 
home has any clue of as long as it stays wilderness. The cell phone call from 
the Trail breaches that. But what are we talking here Kahley? The radio is 
not part of the transformation of the Trail from a remote place to one of 
connected infrastructure. The Cphone is. When a Cphone is used to arrange 
shuttles, make remote calls, or call for pizza it is a tool which serves to 
reduce the previously existing level of wildness on the AT. From there it is 
one compromise after another until no one really needs real wilderness and 
eventually everyone will have so generously and open-mindedly HYOH'ed into a 
completely transformed Trail where the idea of remote existence in nature is 
a foreign concept strange and threatening to their understanding. What will 
be the next harmless step? Presently existing civilization is a good example 
of the end result of your approach. The AT is more than just a path, it's a 
mindset that must be constantly guarding against this kind of creep. The 
Trail is for more than just hiking! The Trail is also the effort it takes to 
resist changing an already perfect place. As you see, man is very subtle and 
insidious in his ways to approve of doing that. The Trail has to be the tough 
one for right reason here. No excuses! The Trail should remain first and 
foremost a wild, remote and disconnected place. If you want to reach it, 
you're going to have to figure it out as others did before. Don't be a part 
of bringing into the Trail that which it was designed to exclude by 
deliberate plan. Overcome the civilization reflex. The AT is a place where it 
doesn't belong...
      
      Sorry to put it that way, but you are metaphorically bulldozing a 
driveway into a philosophical corridor I feel strongly about. If it meant 
preventing others from using cell phones on the Trail, I would volunteer to 
leave the radio behind on my next hike...


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