国产吃瓜黑料

GET MORE WITH OUTSIDE+

Enjoy 35% off GOES, your essential outdoor guide

UPGRADE TODAY

Music makes hanging around a campfire even more hypnotic than it already is.
(illustration: Henry McCausland)
Music makes hanging around a campfire even more hypnotic than it already is.
Music makes hanging around a campfire even more hypnotic than it already is. (illustration: Henry McCausland)

Published: 

Are Backwoods Beats Really Harmless?

Most of us hit the outdoors seeking calm and quiet, but Chuck Thompson prefers to blast a little 38 Special by his campfires. Still, even a rustic headbanger like him has to wonder if the coming age of total connectivity in otherwise wild places is good for bees, beasts, and man.

New perk: Easily find new routes and hidden gems, upcoming running events, and more near you. Your weekly Local Running Newsletter has everything you need to lace up! .

I鈥檇 like to ask that you not judge me for what I鈥檓 about to say. Though I know you probably will.

Two years ago, I made an important discovery鈥攖hat Thin Lizzy, specifically the Jailbreak album recorded by those star-crossed Irish legends, actually enhanced the experience of hiking in Central Oregon鈥檚 Mount Jefferson Wilderness.

It happened by accident, more or less. All I knew that morning, with eight miles and lots of elevation gain lying ahead, was that I needed a few classic jams to help push me through. So I brought my iPod and earbuds, just like I do when I鈥檓 out for a run in my neighborhood.

What I didn鈥檛 know was that I鈥檇 taken the first strides into a thicket of backwoods recrimination and guilt-inducing moral ambiguities. Do electronics belong in the wilderness? If so, to what extent? And what kinds? These questions are currently being debated by ideological progressives and puritans alike, not just on outdoor-related websites but in the medical community and the halls of Congress. Opinions come from a bewildering range of people, everybody from peer-reviewed scientists to borderline cranks, and it鈥檚 not always easy to tell who鈥檚 who.

On that promising morning, though, discord was but a faint abstraction as I began to learn how much I loved packing tunes into the woods. Then, after merely hiking with music, I graduated to camping with music. The breakthrough was the acquisition of one of my favorite gadgets ever鈥攖he iHome iHM60 rechargeable mini speaker. About the size of a racquetball, this featherweight little gizmo pumps out surprisingly resonant beats. It works whether the lakeside mood calls for Drake or Thy Art Is Murder. Or, for that matter, Lakeside.

After these bands became part of my rustic jamboree, I went further into the production end. My tasteful campfire playlist now includes acoustic and semiacoustic leaf-rustlers from the Marshall Tucker Band, Robert Earl Keen, Israel Nash, First Aid Kit, Jolie Holland, the profoundly uncool Spyro Gyra (no apologies鈥攖hey鈥檙e from Buffalo, by the way), and a little-known Canadian folkstress named Lindsay Ferguson, whose touching ballad 鈥淪hips鈥 never fails to stop everyone mid-s鈥檓ore.

There鈥檚 no denying it. Music makes hanging around a campfire even more hypnotic than it already is. In the Yukon鈥檚 stunning Kluane National Park, it also gave our little party comfort. We let the iHM60 purr through the night in an effort (successful, apparently) to keep the park鈥檚 grizzlies at bay while we slept.


Still, while I鈥檝e enjoyed this new world of camping wonder, I never felt completely at ease about my zeal for arriving in the backcountry with guests named 38 Special and Breakbot鈥攁 moral dilemma that鈥檚 been around longer than you鈥檇 think.

As far back as 1978, outdoor writer Patrick McManus called the bleating of transistor radios in the woods 鈥渁mong the most hideous sounds on earth.鈥 In their 1993 book , Laura and Guy Waterman presented a full-on case against outdoor electronics, calling them an affront to the spirit of the occasion. 鈥淢uch more important than the intrusion of noise is the intrusion of a tie back to the world of technology and civilization,鈥 they wrote. 鈥淲ilderness has nonhuman significance…. Wilderness is a place where we leave Earth alone.鈥

This predicament has become exponentially more complex with the universal wireless miracle that compels us, like it or not, to remain attached to civilization wherever we roam. We鈥檝e left the quaint world of transistor radios far behind, and most of us seem electrified to have done so. After all, only lunatics would argue for an outdoor ban on all modern technology, which includes everything from digital cameras to water purifiers to life-saving SOS devices. And goddammit, seeing as how they went to the trouble of inventing it, I鈥檓 not prepared to give up my Jetboil.

It鈥檚 connectivity that鈥檚 causing unprecedented concern.

Studies are proliferating on “electrosmog,” the blanket of electromagnetic fields that we've cast across the planet, which could be harmful to various wild species

On the surface, it would seem that my backwoods beats are harmless, so long as I鈥檓 not a jerk about inflicting my noise on other people. But the entire notion of technology in the woods turns out to be a much more significant issue than that, with ramifications that can鈥檛 just be reined in simply by using the volume control.

Even when we鈥檙e not actively interacting with the digital world, our devices are. Packing music into the toolies isn鈥檛 just about being a clueless boor with questionable habits in the field. It鈥檚 also about being a clueless boor who might be harming the environment. Literally.

Around the world, studies are proliferating on the devastating effects of 鈥渆lectrosmog,鈥 the blanket of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) that we鈥檝e cast across the planet, which could be harmful to various wild species. For example, German scientist Ulrich Warnke has argued that there鈥檚 a link between colony collapse disorder in bees and our mania for cell phones, whose RF waves discombobulate bees鈥 orientation and navigation mechanisms.

Then there鈥檚 FirstNet, a nationwide wireless-broadband network for emergency communications that was approved by federal law in 2012. Backed by numerous studies, the Department of the Interior has raised concerns about the harmful effects it may have on migratory birds. In a dramatically titled 2014 book, , Katie Singer reports on a Spanish study of a frog habitat located near a cell tower. Researchers found that frogs artificially shielded from the antennae鈥檚 waves had a mortality rate of 4.2 percent. Frogs left exposed to the waves reportedly suffered a whopping 90 percent mortality rate.


Singer is a consultant who works with the Vermont-based , which studies鈥攁nd generally opposes鈥攆ederal standards for environmental exposures to non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation associated with broadcast, radar, mobile-phone, and personal-wireless technologies. As I grew morally muddled about my habit of camping with electronics, which has come to also include a smartphone and tablet, I decided to call her at her home in northern New Mexico.

鈥淭hese issues you鈥檙e raising are actually terrifying, but the questions need to be asked,鈥 she tells me. 鈥淲e have deployed all this stuff without asking: Is there any harm here to ourselves, to biodiversity, to the entire ecosystem?鈥

Singer talks with me on a landline; as she mentions, she has never owned a cell phone. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 mind telling you that I don鈥檛 have a cell phone, except that it can trivialize the issue, because then that鈥檚 all people focus on,鈥 she says. 鈥淭hey think, 鈥極h God, is she totally weird or what?鈥 Yes, I am weird, but that鈥檚 not what we鈥檙e talking about.鈥

We end up talking about the Federal Communications Commission. Singer is tweaked by the FCC鈥檚 July 2016 that it is taking steps to enable rapid development of next-generation 5G technologies and mandate the spread of wireless to rural areas.

To deliver the expected huge leap in performance, 5G will likely depend on 鈥渕illimeter waves,鈥 signals in the high frequency range. Scientists are already looking at the health risks these pose. Singer speaks emphatically about the potential harm to wildlife.

Albert Manville, a former biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and now an adjunct faculty member at Johns Hopkins University, echoes Singer鈥檚 view that there is legitimate cause for worry. 鈥淐omplicating the issue is the fact that there currently are no standards for wildlife exposure,鈥 he says. 鈥淭hat includes the licensing and regulatory rules and procedures of the FCC.鈥

The FCC hasn鈥檛 updated its guidelines for power-density exposure to humans since the passage of the Telecommunications Act in 1996. Singer points out that section 704 of the act includes a clause that forbids state and local governments from regulating 鈥渨ireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions.鈥 According to critics like Singer, this verbiage means that even if everyone in your town agrees that a proposed new cell tower is going to kill all the birds, bees, and frogs, your city council is legally prohibited from denying a permit based on emissions. In effect, telecom profits trump environmental health.


During his remaining time in office, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler isn鈥檛 expected to exercise the hand of restraint in this Wild West of wireless. Prior to assuming his post in 2013, Wheeler was a famed advocate for telecom-industry interests. From 1992 to 2004, he served as president and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, a group that describes itself as lobbying for the industry 鈥渁t all levels of government.鈥 That鈥檚 no bullshit, either. President Obama once called him 鈥渢he Bo Jackson of telecom.鈥

I thought Wheeler might be able to shed some useful light on the government鈥檚 plans for backcountry wireless. But the FCC media office ignored no fewer than five e-mail and phone requests for statements from him or anybody else鈥攁bout 5G, section 704, or anything that touches on the wireless wilderness.

Meanwhile, the news from the government is relentlessly pro-wireless. In January 2016, five Democratic congressmen, led by Jared Huffman of California, sent a letter to Obama urging funding to extend Wi-Fi and cell service throughout all of America鈥檚 national parks.

The effort sparked the expected Internet opprobrium, but when I get Huffman on the phone, he comes across as a thoughtful guy who鈥檚 simply in favor of a popular proposal.

鈥淚鈥檓 not hearing any blowback to the idea that our visitor centers and park facilities should have basic connectivity,鈥 he tells me. 鈥淥verwhelmingly, people agree that it鈥檚 a good idea.鈥

Huffman鈥檚 Second Congressional District stretches from the Oregon border all the way to Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and it includes heavy hitters like Redwoods National Park.

鈥淲e have to recognize that a new generation is coming up, and they access information differently and experience the parks differently,鈥 Huffman says. 鈥淲e need to keep up with the times.鈥

(Henry McCausland)

Huffman also waves off environmental teeth-gnashing. As a member of the California State Assembly, he says, he worked with the state鈥檚 Council of Science and Technology to survey the land use and produce a report after public concerns arose because the California Public Utilities Commission authorized the installation of new wireless smart meters throughout the state.

鈥淚鈥檓 aware that there are a number of people who worry about [electrosmog], but it has never been validated by any peerreviewed science,鈥 he says. 鈥淭he California Council on Science and Technology did not validate concerns about EMFs and health risks.

鈥淚 really don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 an issue,鈥 he adds. 鈥淔rom what I鈥檓 told, there are far greater EMF exposures that people should be concerned about from their microwave ovens.鈥


I鈥檓 cynical about all politicians, but Huffman doesn鈥檛 strike me as unreasonable. Even so, his 鈥渆verybody just chill out鈥 position is cold comfort for people like Singer, who are perpetually frustrated by government agendas and roadblocks in the face of a danger they perceive as self-evident. Approach this byzantine subject from any angle and you鈥檙e in danger of tumbling into an enormous gulf of misunderstanding and distrust of Big Government. Given my own frustrating experience trying to pry an official word or two out of the FCC, it鈥檚 easy to see how cynicism develops around the issue.

When I first called Singer, I was stone in love with pumping up my campfire sounds. An hour on the phone with her was like rayeeain on my wedding day, a black fly in my chardonnay. But it was also, still, the good advice that I just couldn鈥檛 take. I might not be as gaga over wireless as the rest of the planet, but I鈥檓 not as freaked out as people like Singer seem to think I should be. And I鈥檇 gotten attached to having Norah Jones in my tent at night.

It was that damn frog study that kept nagging at me. Ninety percent mortality rate? Jesus!

I decided to take my problems, literally, to Nancy Messinger. A cofounder of the Portland Natural Medicine clinic in Oregon, Messinger is a cardiac nurse and electromagnetic-radiation specialist certified by the International Institute for Building Biology and Ecology in Santa Fe. I wanted her to give me a precise sense of my personal electronic footprint in the wild. Messinger鈥檚 EMF-mitigated office鈥攊t鈥檚 surrounded by poured-concrete walls that are two feet thick鈥攊s rigged with an impressive set of research-grade meters, gizmos, and assessment instruments for detecting radiation and radio frequencies. 鈥淭he Europeans, especially the Germans, are light-years ahead of us in understanding this stuff,鈥 she says.

We have to recognize that a new generation is coming up, and they access information differently and experience the parks differently.

I lay out my favorite backwoods toys鈥攊Phone, iPod, iPad, the adorable iHome mini speaker. She breaks out Gigahertz Solutions鈥 HFE59B meter with a UBB 27 omnidirectional antenna (to measure radio frequencies) and a Gigahertz NFA 1000 EMF/gauss meter that measures magnetic and electrical fields.

The unit of irradiance we鈥檙e measuring is microwatts per square meter, or 碌W/m虏. 鈥淎nything over 1,000 microwatts per square meter is a serious concern,鈥 Messinger says, because increased exposure may create health risks.

She begins by waving the HFE59B over my iPhone. Bursts of loud static tear through the room. The meter surges between 4,720 and 6,000 碌W/m虏.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 not bad compared with my Android phone,鈥 she says. She tests her phone to demonstrate. The meter crackles and pops like an angry bug zapper as it bounces between 8,530 and 15,140 碌W/m虏. The iPad fares better, registering anywhere between 1,770 and 4,050 碌W/m虏 while it pulses, searching in vain for a wireless connection in the bunker office.

The iPod is a disaster. It blows the meter to 14,000 碌W/m虏 when it鈥檚 turned on and finally settles in at 13,830 碌W/m虏 as it cries out for an electronic mama every two seconds like an orphan in a barren field.


The numbers certainly seem ominous, but what do they actually mean?

Messinger whips out a chart of reported health effects associated with RF radiation. The data on it comes from , a report issued by 29 international scientists and health experts who warn of possible risks from wireless technologies and electromagnetic fields, based on information from more than 1,800 studies. Exposure to a given source of radiation varies depending on how far away you are, and Messinger appears to have peppered the chart with a few examples (鈥淢icrowave oven at 4 ft.,鈥 鈥淐ell phone at 30 ft.鈥), benchmarks for predicting exposure levels herself.

According to the studies in the BioInitiative report, adverse conditions connected with exposure to a power density of 100 碌W/m虏 include headaches, sleep loss, and concentration problems. At 10,000 碌W/m虏, studies indicate emotional and behavioral changes, weakened immune systems, and a doubled leukemia risk in adults. At 100,000 碌W/m虏 and up, you鈥檙e looking at DNA damage, loss of critical cell functions, and learning problems in children.

There are just two entries at the 10,000,000 mark on the top of Messinger鈥檚 chart: 鈥淒NA damage exceeds repair ability鈥 and 鈥淔CC Limit.鈥

鈥淭he FCC is ridiculous,鈥 Messinger says, laughing hard when I bring up my attempts to talk with someone there. 鈥淭here鈥檚 going to be major fallout from all this wireless,鈥 she adds. 鈥淲e can鈥檛 feel what it鈥檚 doing to us, but that doesn鈥檛 mean it鈥檚 not happening.鈥

Messinger seems like a grounded person, but a lot of people will tell you that the scare science is dubious. She shows me a 2013 Swedish study linking cordless and cellular phones with increased risk of brain tumors. It includes spooky MRI scans of microwave-absorption damage in brains, particularly among children.

When I call Dr. Jill Barnholtz-Sloan, a lead epidemiologist at the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, she鈥檚 more equivocal. 鈥淚n the past 12 to 15 years, the incidence of malignant brain tumors in the U.S. has not increased,鈥 she says from her cell phone while riding in a car between Cleveland and Detroit. Recent increases in reports of nonmalignant brain tumors are attributable to changes in ways that information is being collected and recorded, she says.

But what about studies linking brain tumors to radiation emitted by cell phones and wireless gadgets?

鈥淒ata so far has been very inconsistent,鈥 she says. 鈥淚 think we all believe the jury is still out on that because of the inconsistency of the current evidence.鈥


I went into this process seeking clarity鈥攐r at least some assurance that bringing Golden Smog into the woods didn鈥檛 mean I was actually polluting the place. What emerged instead were passionate responses from people with clashing agendas that played out like a Taylor Swift鈥揔anye West feud鈥攚hich is tough for me, because I like them both.

The problem with my fretting all along, however, has been the spectral understanding that none of it really matters. No matter how much malignant data we keep amassing, does anyone really ever expect the clock to be turned back on wireless technology?

鈥淗aving a little bit of wireless connectivity does not necessarily compromise the wilderness experience. It doesn鈥檛 mean Pok茅mon Go,鈥 Congressman Huffman has assured me. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not a sinister plot, it鈥檚 not a conspiracy.鈥

However you feel about that statement, it鈥檚 happening. So what does it matter that I stop hiking with my electronics if people like Huffman and Tom Wheeler are determined to 鈥渆nhance鈥 the wilderness with wireless waves?

Of course, leaving gadgets at home doesn鈥檛 have to mean leaving music at home.

Maybe on my next hike, before it鈥檚 too late, I鈥檒l place my iPod on the kitchen counter, lace up my boots, and walk out into the country, as far as I can get from the wireless cage. Another kind of jailbreak.

I鈥檒l imagine Tom Wheeler hiking alongside me. Maybe, just after we鈥檝e started down that dusty trail, I鈥檒l turn to him and, invoking yet another classic, let him know that, even without digital support, we can still be men in harmony with the wilderness. 鈥淵ou do know how to whistle, don鈥檛 you, Tom?鈥 I鈥檒l say. 鈥淵ou just put your lips together and blow.鈥

is the author of five books, including .