Buffalo graze in Yellowstone National Park. (puroticorico / flickr) http://www.flickr.com/photos/puroticorico/ / CC BY 2.0
Open the March 2010 issue of Backpacker magazine to page 59, and you’ll see a blurb called “The Rangers are Watching” I wrote about wilderness web cams in Yellowstone National Park.
While I quote Yellowstone superintendent Suzanne Lewis telling hikers to not be concerned about web cameras showing up in the backcountry to watch over campsites and trails, I maintain a healthy level of skepticism about the future. Yellowstone officials just adopted a comprehensive plan for the use of technology in the famous national park, and in that report is the suggestion that web cams can be used for “resource monitoring or safety concerns … .“
I added the emphasis.
Current administrators, including new National Parks Service director Jon Jarvis, have told me there’s no issue about web cam surveillance in the backcountry. But the Yellowstone report raises the issue, and so I’m going to take the invite. Plus, one of the constant debates we’re having in this young century is about privacy, from the Patriot Act to airport screening. The National Park Service isn’t immune to that debate.
Take a look at your calendar. We’re currently about four weeks from Feb. 22. Why is that date notable? That’s when loaded firearms will be permitted in U.S. national parks, according to a law passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama last May.
A small amount of snow lays in Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah. (proimos / flickr) http://www.flickr.com/photos/proimos/ / CC BY 2.0
My goal here is not to be an alarmist. I don’t expect an immediate spike in gun violence in national parks, and I remain ambivalent about my feelings regarding the new gun law.
But violence will happen. In some ways, it existed before this new gun law, but the legal introduction of firearms into the national parks will heighten awareness of safety issues. We have cameras watching city streets in major metro areas and small towns, and I see nothing that’s going to prevent us from discussing the possibility of wilderness Web cams in the future. The introduction of guns in national parks, I think, will inspire some people to call for greater measures of safety.
One day, someone will become the victim of a crime committed by someone using a firearm in the backcountry. The victim’s family and supporters will start calling for greater safety measures. If only a camera had caught the crime or the perpetrator …
And when they learn the National Park Service has the capabilities to plant small, barely noticeable Web cams in the backcountry, they’ll demand more for the safety of backcountry users. If Google can photograph every inch of the world already, our ability to have privacy on public lands, even in the backcountry, has been compromised. Justice, law, order … all ethical reasons to implement surveillance cameras along trails and campsites, they’ll say.
And what if that hypothetical gun crime occurs in the Yellowstone backcountry, in an area covered by a “resource management” web cam operated by the National Park Service. The victim will rightfully declare the video be made available so the criminal can be identified and justice can be administered.
Mountains line the horizon in Olympic National Park, Wash. (jasonpratt / flickr) http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonpratt/ / CC BY 2.0
Whether or not having surveillance Web cameras in the backcountry is a sufficient deterrent to crime and a necessary safety measure or an over officious intrusive device, we’re going to debate those merits in the coming decades.
What I find unacceptable is how the Yellowstone administration, in its comprehensive plan mentioned above, won’t allow the public to view what the “resource management” cameras are broadcasting. That’s appalling. How do we as the public know the people in charge of those cameras are using those cameras for the right purposes? There’s no inherent checks and balances built into the system, and I find that unsettling.
What’s wrong with the public being able to see what the national park system can see on those cameras? Even if Yellowstone decides to use web cams just for resource management, then somebody needs to be watching those who are watching the cameras.
We’re in a new age of technology, and technology will only get faster, more efficient, able to do more in smaller spaces. Web cams will evolve this way, too. And when the safety of people are of concern, there will be leaders and advocates who will want the powers-that-be to deploy any measures within their means to keep people safe.
And with the introduction of guns in national parks, I believe the calls for greater safety and surveillance will only grow with each horrific crime committed in the backcountry by a person wielding a gun.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Ignoring the web cam issue (which IMO is appalling) , I am just staggered that guns would be allowed in National Parks. Stunned and speechless. Must say I feel incredibly lucky to live in Australia.
Cheers!
I used to like getting out into the national park backcountry to “get away from it all” and for privacy. I’m pretty disturbed by the complete lack of privacy nowadays and now it’s spreading out into the places people go to to get away. Worst thing the national park service could have possibly done.
The new gun law applies to national wildlife refuges too. Which means there could be a concern about increased poaching.
Mike,
I want to be clear … Yellowstone has made no specific decision at this time to implement surveillance cameras in the backcountry for the purpose of safety. They have merely raised the possibility in their comprehensive plan.
Yellowstone officials are considering strongly the possibility of using web cams for resource management. For example, monitoring buffalo herd migration during the worst of the winter months.
…and here I thought the feeling of being watched while hiking alone was just a figment of my imagination.
Oh spare me please, crimes have always occured in the backcountry of NP’s. Backcountry will be much safer now, when armed and dangerous criminals and nutjobs will think twice about accosting hikers. If you haven’t run into a potentially violent weirdo, who’s a crystal meth user or backcountry producer, a lone, deranged and unstable mental patient, or a freakrunning away from he law, you haven’t spent much time in the backcountry. With guns now allowed, the safety of all hikers in terms of trail crime has been greatly increased.
Eric,
I’ll have to stop you on that one. I’ve spent plenty of hours and days in the backcountry, and while I have run across plenty of characters, I haven’t seen many dangerous hikers at all. Drives me crazy when people spread a myth about the American woods being filled with deranged, insane, unstable, dangerous people when the crime rate in national parks is significantly less than in the rest of American society. I’d suspect the rate of sane to insane people is probably about the same or less in the wilderness compared to the rest of society. And if you run into a “lone, deranged and unstable mental patient or a freak running away from the law,” I doubt your gun is going to stop an assailant who isn’t thinking rationally.
The issue I raised here, though, isn’t whether people should or should not carry guns in American national parks. I’m focused instead on what affect the new law will have on national park safety measures. My prediction is because technology has improved to provide wireless web cams and safety risks increase with the introduction of loaded guns into national parks, the understaffed park service will look to Web cam technology to monitor resources, safety, animal herds to prohibit illegal activity.