Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board hiking with I-pods

Phydeau (or anyone), is there a law regulating how much noise one can make in the wilderness? Disturbing the peace?

And I'm not sure how "cool" it was that a ranger handed out a citation for bad judgement. I would like to think a ranger could get compliance with a few serious words of advice rather than having to fine someone in a situation like that. Perhaps if the noisemaker was beligerant and uncooperative a citation might be in order.

Call me old fashioned or naive, but I like the idea of the friendly ranger who is a helpful, wise and shrewd communicator and educator who charms or inspires folks to do the right thing in the wilderness, as opposed to the more modern notion of them being punishers.

By the way, I don't have an I-Pod and definitely appreciate nature, silence and getting into one's own thoughts and soul, or letting one's thoughts melt into silence (they say God waits for a mind to be silent before speaking to it) but this discussion has, perhaps ironically, pushed me a step closer to getting an I-Pod.

I'm thinking that getting high on a bit of music might provide an inspirational boost and pain-reliever on the more grueling parts of a long hike with a heavy pack. But I'd use it judiciously and not constantly and keep one ear open, at least, at all times.

And then there would be the decisions to make: Beethoven or rock 'n' roll? Jazz or reggae? Thelonious Monk or Bob Marley? Duane Allman or Keith Jarrett? Grateful Dead or Nirvana or Van Morrison, or.... On second thought, maybe forget the I-Pod.

What would John Muir do?

NICE!

I definitely agree with the opinion that i-pods are handy companions on lonely hikes. Although I also take into account that considering the amount of time I get to spend in the wilderness (which is very limited), I take full advantage of the time that I have in there including the sounds of nature.

I agree with Wildbug. sounds of nature is very important. it makes a hike...worth hiking.i pods are nice at night. good for sleeping.

Yes, there are regulations covering noise and a wide variety of activities in wilderness areas and national parks/forests. Here's most of them; the part on "Noise is under the "Disorderly Conduct" section:

http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin...action=retrieve

Years ago the high use areas like Whitney (and the San Gorognio Wilderness in So Calif) used to be patrolled pretty regularly by full-time rangers, and they weren't timid about issuing citations with fines. With the way the NPS/NFS's budget has been decimated over the past decade, I'd guess the possibility of being cited is low. However, I'd speculate high use areas like the "suburban" Whitney zone would be a place of high enforcement to try and keep it as "wilderness" as possible.

As for IPods: While I see it as pretty silly to block out all natural sounds with them, there's nothing wrong with them since they are quiet. But if they're distracting your attention on the trail, and either causing you to bump into others on the trail or requiring others to 'avoid' you, then they ARE a problem.

Fines have their place, but fining someone for playing a radio too loud without first asking them to turn it down seems excessive and unecessary. But it's interesting, perhaps a little sad, to read of the glee and satisfaction some people feel when they hear of someone getting fined for a breach of backcountry etiquette.

How would John Muir handle it? Would he have a nice chat with them and help them approach the wilderness in a more aware manner? Would he simply let it slide and move onto a more suitable campsite where he can find the peace he sought? Or would he call in the rangers to bust the offenders and start laying down fines?

I belabor this point because I would rather see rangers and my fellow wilderness campers use loving communication and diplomacy and a first resort, rather than play the role of city-cop law enforcement, cheered on by holier-than-thou folks who think they can save the wilderness by enacting ever longer lists of rules and regulations and punishing the slightest offender for the most marginal infractions.

And I'm not the only one who feels this way. There is a contemporary tradition of some back country rangers purposely NOT carrying their sidearms despite job descriptions that say they should. Not all rangers prefer to be overly judgemental "cops" of the wilderness looking to bust folks at every turn in the trail (of if someone turns a radio on too loud in exhuberation and exhilleration of finally being free and breathing fine mountain air.

Fines do have there place as one method of acheiving compliance, and I'd guess rangers are a little more lax in less traveled wilderness areas. However, in a heavily impacted area like the Whitney zone, maximum enforcement is probably the way it has to be handled. If you want the "wilderness experience", how are you gonna find it with the volume on your "ghetto blaster" turned up to 11 while playing "Big Bottom"? You'll scare off all the wildlife. And how will others like it?

Go ahead and use your I-Pod with earbuds; it looks silly to me, and seems like something out of Huxley's "Brave New World". But there's no regulation against making yourself look silly. However, if it distracts your attention, don't blame me for not warning you before you step on the illegally discarded wag bag. And no, I WON'T give you a ride in my car with THOSE sh!t covered shoes! Those are MY regulations in MY car and I'm enforcing them to the maximum extent!

Sorry phydeux, I look silly even without the Ipod, so I might as well... besides, I won't need a ride in your car, and my Ipod actually sharpens my other senses and makes me smell the wag bag so that I can easily avoid it while working on my dance moves...

The era of John Muir has long passed, and the dynamics of the Mt. Whitney area have changed considerably. Just traveling to the Whitney area would be an undertaking in the early 1900's. I'd be surprised if John Muir saw anybody in his travels in the Mt. Whitney area, including any rangers, much less anybody with an I-Pod or boom box. You may want to experience that fantasy of piece and serenity in the wilderness, with fantasy rangers who show "loving communication and diplomacy and a first resort," but it ain't gonna happen in a high impact area like Mt. Whitney. ITs just like the city - the more people in an area, the higher the non-compliance rate. One person shows up in a desgnated campgound and wants to play their boom box out loud, so everyone else has to move on?

REgarding "loving communication and diplomacy as a first resort," or the friendly ranger giving you a nice, friendly reminder"; how many times do the rangers and staff of the INF have to tell someone what's right or wrong on the Whitney trails? IF you want to go up Whitney you'll 1)get "the lecture" when you pick up your permit and 2) get a written list of rules and regs with your permit (you can also find the rules and regs on the web, too!). After all of that, if you STILL can't abide by the regs, why should the rangers cut you any slack? All they have left is to tap you pocket for a few more $$$.

Its the regualtions, all you have to do is abide by them and you won't have any problems. If you don't want to follow them you don't have to patronize the Mt. Whitney area; there's plenty of other wilderness out there.

I think the "glee and satisfaction" is probably caused by most of us having been the helpless victim of rude people so many times. Turning on a boombox in a place like that is so stupid and arrogant and downright rude, that it should be obvious to anyone that it's not OK. It's simple common sense.

Nobody is dumb enough to think that everyone in hearing range wants to listen to whatever they happen to want to play on their boombox, and it's not their private home or property; so obviously they just didn't care enough to consider that. If the ranger just gave them a nice reminder, how long before they offend how many people by doing the same thing elsewhere? Like the idiots that drive around with their car booming bass for a half mile, they just don't care, and deserve no consideration because they don't give any. I'm afraid that if someone just dropped a big rock on that mountaintop boombox, I'd be smiling about that too.

As for iPods, while I personally think it's silly to use them on a hike (as a rule, there are always exceptions), since they're quiet it's a personal choice. If you don't hear the waterfall, or the quiet, or the mountain lion behind you, or someone yelling "look out!", too bad, you have no one to blame but yourself.

My 16-year-old son brought his iPod on our Half Dome trips, but the only time he fired it up was at night in his tent. He did turn it on once on the second trip while hiking, and after a few minutes said "this is stupid" and stuck it in his pocket.

I wouldn't use an i-anything, but do have an mp3 player which is mostly used for audiobooks. When it's 20 degrees outside and you're in your sleeping bag wanting to "read" a while before you go to sleep, that's a nice way to do it and stay warm. But as for an ipod "enhancing other senses" as someone mentioned, where have I heard that before "I can drive fine while talking on my cell phone" (oops, sorry, whoa, that was close... 8^) Hike around all day in the wilderness with your ipod on if you want, I'll think of it what I want, sounds fair to me.

Many good and valid points have been made.

However, I think there is a problem when people stop communicating directly among themselves and expect "law enforcement" to take care of everything, including asking someone to turn down their radio.

And I also think there is a problem when people treat everyone else as "idiots" when they don't behave the way one thinks they should.

Because so many people are so removed from camping and wilderness experience in their everyday lives, there are bound to be people who haven't learned to practice proper behavior in the wild. Having rules printed on the back of a permit isn't always going to do the trick. Sometimes they can stand some helpful people to point them to the right way. It doesn't always have to be a gun-toting ranger handing out fines.

Think back to the first few times you were in the wilderness. You likely had someone who in a friendly, brother-like manner taught you ways to behave, without you having to be fined or memorize a rule book. And from that a certain respect develops which can then be passed on.

The point I'm making is that as much as possible we should try to treat others in the wilderness as brothers and sisters, not enemy combatants or "idiots." True, it does take some courage and people skills to approach a stranger and gently counsel them about wilderness etiquette, but without stepping up to that challenge we lose something valuable, something that we don't get by treating every incident as a law enforcement issue that we expect the rangers to take care of for us.

The Sierra Club long ago had a tradition of taking 200 or so people into the backcountry for a month at a time. You can imagine that not all of those 200 people knew exactly how to act—where to wash, how to handle food and waste, not to cut switchbacks, etc. But in the course of those classic campouts you can be sure that many newbies learned to tailor their habits and behavior to conform to the best practices of the day. They learned this because others went out of their way to help them, not by having law enforcement officials called in to hand out citations and threaten arrest. Nor was anyone hoping to see their fellow campers fined or arrested.

Respect begets respect. And sometimes we need the cajones to step up to the challenge to approach misbehaving folks as brothers and sisters and help them in their personal evolution toward respecting the outdoors and others who like to be in the outdoors. And it doesn't have to be done in a mean, nasty or condecending manner.

Why should we expect or desire the rangers to handle all this? I think rangers would appreciate if more people could work some of this stuff out among themselves

Someone here pointed out that this is no longer the John Muir era. True, but so much of the attitude and philosophy John Muir taught and practiced remains as relevant as ever and points the way toward greater respect for and health of our wilderness areas. And I don't believe that the wisdom he had to share would have been embraced more deeply or dearly if it was delivered hand in hand with fines and citations delivered by gun-toting men and women wearing military-style uniforms who viewed their job as nothing more than catching people doing things wrong and then punishing them as strictly as the law allows.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for having rangers play their part in protecting the wilderness from people and people from the wilderness. But we're naive to think that law enforcement officials, guns, fines, and condescending, holier-than-thou attitudes of fellow campers alone will solve these troubling problems we all care so much about.

A little love goes a long way. But it can necessitate a bit of bravery and selflessness to follow that path and discover the effectiveness of that power. Too many people have given up on love and diplomacy (often without even trying it) and now leave that job to others or expect that guns and punishment is all that is needed to get the job done. I think that approach is short sighted. The solution relies on a more well-rounded approach and treating others, even "idiots" with a degree of respect.

And truth be told, all of us who think we act so perfect and are the ultimate outdoors person, from the largest perspective, there is not one of us who doesn't act like an "idiot" one time or another. Which one of us hasn't, at least once, carelessly stepped on and crushed a flower that, from one perspective, might be considered one of the most beautiful but delicate things on Earth? Who among us has not ever shattered the peace and solitude of another?

trail camp, July 26, half a dozen campers having a group sing of eight or nine unfamiliar hymns. they were sweet, but cloying after the first few... so then,ipod ON. similarly on returning from summit July 27, another group had swept into the same site and was having an extended tension convention about how all the excess food they brought wasn't going to fit in their bear canister, wah - ipod ON. moral - guess i should have selected a spot further away to avoid the stigma of being seen shutting out "nature's sounds." patrick wolf - get lost modest mouse - float on

David,

Well said.

CaT

Yes, plenty are that dumb.

I took an ipod nano and a solar charger on my recent High Sierra Trail and JMT hike. I only used it a few times and I was happy I had it.

After going over trail crest, I went crazy with my gear and sent back everything I didn't absolutely need. I really wish I kept the nano for the next two weeks on the JMT. Ever had 3 lines from a song stuck in your head for 2 weeks? It drove me crazy.

I really appreciated it after hitting the Whitney zone. There were so many people that I sort of freaked out and ended up listening to it the whole way down while in my own little world.

If I had it when it hit Yosemite Valley, I would have listened to it as well. I probably would have gotten bit by a rattlesnake on the Mist trail though. I barely missed it as it was.

So David, you're out in the wilderness with your wife or your 16 year old daughter.

A group of rowdy young men come up, set up camp near you, and begin partying with said boom box cranked at full volume. Good naturedly you put up with it for awhile, but pretty soon it's time to retire, you can't even hear each other speak, and there's no sign of it letting up.

You going to go confront these guys and potentially put your family member at risk? Or, are you just going to break camp and leave?

I don't know that it's a matter of "cajones". In some cases, no matter how macho you may be, circumstances might dictate that descretion be better than confrontation.

My question would be: Why is it conversant upon those of us with a clue, to constantly "gently educate" those who willfully and consciously refuse to have a clue? Your assumption is that people don't know any better. I disagree. I think most folks completely know what they're doing has an impact on others, and just don't care.

Let's see, spend five minutes on this board, and we can come up with the following "syllabus" of things we apparently need to educate folks on:

- Proper use and disposal of wagbags
- Proper disposal of trash
- Proper storage of food and scented items
- Noise Etiquette in camp and on the trail
- Etiquette of passing or allowing others to pass on trail
- Don't pee near the stream/lake
- Don't wash your dishes in the stream/lake
- Don't camp near the stream/lake
. . .

All of these basically amount to simply showing consideration and respect for others. If someone hasn't learned that by the time they're ten years old, I seriously doubt that you're going to instill in them what their parents were apparently to lazy to do in 30 seconds of gentle coaxing. And, why must I constantly act as a policeman for the rest of the world? Is it just too much to expect others to behave halfway decently?

I disagree that its a matter of ignorance. Using a more familar example:

Everyone already knows that running red lights is wrong; Yet I see it virtually every day. In L.A. people run the red on left turns at almost every signal change.
Everyone already knows that calling 911 for a non-emergency is wrong. But, it happens constantly.
Everyone already knows that driving in the carpool lane by yourself is wrong. Still we see it every day.

These folks are not ignorant; they willfully and consciously CHOOSE to flout the law and put other peoples lives at risk because it's personally convenient for them. Just as the person who stashes his/her wagbag behind a rock rather than pack it out is willfully and consciously making a decision to leave their refuse behind for others to clean up after. Good luck "gently persuading" them that they should actually carry it out.

The amounts imposed as fines clearly aren't enough to deter most folks from misbehaving. My opinion is keep permits cheap, but have the minimum fine for any of these trangressions start at $1000 and go up from there. Warn folks when they pick their permits up, and if they CHOOSE to do these things and get caught, maybe they will (reluctantly) change their ways next time.

ClamberAbout, I'm not sure what your point is.

One can always make up hypothetical extreme situations as you have that would seem to call for extreme actions. I really wonder how many folks you have met in the wilderness who, as you say "willfully and consciously refuse to have a clue."
Sure, call the ranger if that situation comes about and you and your family members are truly in danger. That would be totally understandable and prudent. That's one of the things rangers are there to help with.

But too often hypothetical extreme examples do nothing more than spread fear and are used to justify extreme reactions to situations that are anything but extreme.

Your write:



Again, you confuse me. It seems like you, and others, DO want to act as policemen for the rest of the world, or call in policemen to do what you wish to avoid facing straight on. And maybe if you do face those situations straight on, with the right attitude, it won't turn into the type of "confrontation" you understandably wish to avoid.

It's often a matter of where YOUR own heart is as to how problematic situations turn out. As I wrote before, a little love goes a long way. But, granted, a lot of folks are so unacustomed to exercising that facility that they might not appreciate or feel comfortable tapping into its potential power. They basically don't believe in the power of love.

I believe part of the purpose of this forum IS to educate folks about how best to handle themselves in the wilderness, and not just be a place where folks rant and rave about being the victims of the less well-educated or less experienced and simply wish to have the latter expelled from the wilderness by the hands of the "authorities." Sorry, I just don't think that is a healthy attitude.

The wilderness is a place WHERE folks ARE educated and healed in sublime ways and then, often, carry that good energy back to the cities. And then they often become advocates for preserving the wilderness. But the kind of education and healing I'm talking about is not the kind that is delivered with a gun and citation book or spread through mean, selfish and fearful attitudes.

So, I'm not really sure what it is you are advocating, but I still stand behind what I wrote in my previous posting.

David Ciaffardini

another mp3 (or 8)-- they might be giants - careful what you pack -- Donny Hue And The Colors - Mountain Piece -- Akron Family - Gone Beyond -- Pinback - From Nothing To Nowhere -- Rob Crow - Up -- Other Men - Other People -- Blitzen Trapper - Wild Mountain Nation (Acoustic) -- The New Po***graphers - My Rights Versus Yours

ClamberAbout:

What trail are you on where you find people that would harm your wife or 16 year old daughter because you told them that their music was disturbing you? By speaking to someone calmly and politely it would be a bit absurd to think that they would react with violence. However, if you run to a ranger who gives them a "minimum $1,000 fine" without ever giving them a chance to just turn it down, that may lead to a bad situation. Worst case scenario; you ask them to kill the music, they choose not to, then you leave.

Speaking of things we should have learned by the time we are ten years old, I was under the impression that not being a tattle-tale was a lesson as well as how to handle problems like adults. If you are really so afraid to have civil words with humans because they may beat you up, maybe you are the one whose parents were lacking in the "gentle coaxing" department.

This thread *was* about music. David hijacked the conversation to start preaching his personal philosophy, proclaiming in effect, that people aren't responsible for their own actions, don't know better, aren't aware of the effect their actions have on others, and we should all interrupt our quiet, well earned, non-obtrusive enjoyment of the wilderness to go act as surrogate "mommies" to these other folks and "educate" them otherwise.

Is it unreasonable of me to resent having to (constantly) do this? In June, in five minutes, I went around and collected more than half a dozen used wagbags, and a very large quantity of trash near our campsite at Trailcamp prior to heading back down the mountain. Have either of you done this?

I am a reasonable, even tempered person. However, my experience is that other people do not like to be told what to do - in whatever form you choose to put it - especially when they're doing something they *know* is obnoxious. Come on, do you really, really think people are that naive that they don't know when they're doing something that negatively affects others around them? Please.

If you have some magic formula that makes the two of you successful at curbing the "bad" behavior of others, hey, more power to you! Please, continue. I very much look forward to seeing the effects of your work on my next trip up the mountain!

Now, how about returning the thread back to a discussion of iPod's and music? If you'd like to 'dis' me some more, let's take the discussion off-line; feel free to send me a private message.