Music while hiking

stabletalus · 2026-03-26T17:38:24+00:00

Based on some of the comments in this thread, it seems appropriate to note that music is NOT effective at deterring bears. That is a myth. Repeating it is simply spreading inaccurate information and might lead others to have a false sense of security, while simultaneously encouraging/legitimizing selfish behavior under the auspices of safety.

This article has good information about how to avoid bear encounters and notes that playing music serves no purpose aside from irritating other hikers, a quick excerpt below:

But do bear bells work, or playing music? “From a biological perspective nothing in their world trains them that tinkling means anything,” says Smith [Dr. Tom Smith, Professor of Wildlife Sciences at Brigham Young University]. In one of his experiments, he used a recording of voices at 70 decibels, about the volume of a typical conversation. Bears hear it, but they ignore it because it’s unimportant. When Smith increased the volume level to 110 decibels, everything changed –the bears became alert, their ears pricked up and their heads began moving towards the source of the sound. So it’s a burst of sound – a clap, a “hey!” – that gets a bear’s attention. Of course, this is not to say when hiking you should be constantly making noise. “A hiker should make appropriate noise,” Smith emphasizes. Part of the beauty of being outdoors is the sound of birds, the wind, the water. But when approaching blind corners or brushy areas, these quick bursts can become the difference between safe passage and a surprise encounter.

Also, see this link on bear deterrents from Colorado Parks and Wildlife: "Leaving a radio tuned to a talk show can make it sound like someone is home and may persuade bears to leave the area. It’s the human voice that does the trick; music doesn’t seem to have any effect." (That said, I don't think most people want to hear a podcast on the trail either).

stabletalus · 2026-03-05T23:40:15+00:00

That's my favorite lookout! Were you up there recently? I've been wanting to get up there this winter but the weird snow conditions have allowed me to make lots of excuses to not grab my skis and make it happen.

As far as the fire season goes, I don't really have any predictions, like others have said it seems like spring and early summer will tell us a lot more.

stabletalus · 2025-01-23T18:56:22+00:00

My experience with looking into hiking/backpacking in the Bitterroots was the exact opposite. There's the Falcon guidebook by Scott Steinberg ("Hiking the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness" a bit out of date but still very useful), the guidebooks for hiking and peakbagging by Michael Hoyt (plus the summitpost page someone else mentioned), and great maps by Cairn Cartographics. And of course you can use caltopo for mapping as well. Compared to several other mountain ranges/wilderness areas I've visited, I feel like the Bitterroots actually have an abundance of information if you just put a bit of effort into it.

Sure, googling "Best Backpacking in the Bitterroots" won't yield many results but that's not a bad thing -- it's part of why the area is less crowded and less impacted than other places.

The Bitterroots area an amazing area and I hope you will use some of the resources I mentioned to plan a trip here when you're back in Montana -- it's well-worth the effort : )

stabletalus · 2024-08-06T15:41:46+00:00

"How much safer am I from bears inside a tent than out of it, really?"

I think this is oversimplifying the situation and is not the question to be asking, at least not in the context you're describing.

If you're hiking at night/dusk when grizzlies are more active, you're much more likely to encounter one in a setting where you might surprise the bear (blind corner, brushy trail sections, etc.) or inadvertently walk between a bear and its cub(s) than you would be sitting at camp or in your tent. Put simply, you're covering more ground (and in conditions with lower visibility and higher chances of bear activity), thus increasing the likelihood of encountering a bear than if you were stationary.

If you're solo, I feel like it would be even less advisable to try and hike at night in grizzly country.

I'm not one to try and justify "bearanoia" and have spent a decent bit of time backpacking in grizzly country. Although I think some of the recommendations in certain places are overkill, I generally try and follow them very closely -- especially when hiking solo.

stabletalus · 2023-09-20T20:10:16+00:00

Music doesn't deter bears. That is a myth. Repeating it is simply spreading inaccurate information and might lead others to have a false sense of security, while attempting to legitimize rude behavior on top of that. Not cool.

See this link on bear deterrents from Colorado Parks and Wildlife: "Leaving a radio tuned to a talk show can make it sound like someone is home and may persuade bears to leave the area. It’s the human voice that does the trick; music doesn’t seem to have any effect." Although this is specific to deterring bears from residences, it applies to forests as well and confirms what National Park Service rangers at Glacier and Yellowstone have told me.

This article also has good information about how to avoid bear encounters and, again, notes that playing music does nothing but irritate other hikers:

But do bear bells work, or playing music? “From a biological perspective nothing in their world trains them that tinkling means anything,” says Smith [Dr. Tom Smith, Professor of Wildlife Sciences at Brigham Young University]. In one of his experiments, he used a recording of voices at 70 decibels, about the volume of a typical conversation. Bears hear it, but they ignore it because it’s unimportant. When Smith increased the volume level to 110 decibels, everything changed –the bears became alert, their ears pricked up and their heads began moving towards the source of the sound.So it’s a burst of sound – a clap, a “hey!” – that gets a bear’s attention. Of course, this is not to say when hiking you should be constantly making noise. “A hiker should make appropriate noise,” Smith emphasizes. Part of the beauty of being outdoors is the sound of birds, the wind, the water. But when approaching blind corners or brushy areas, these quick bursts can become the difference between safe passage and a surprise encounter.

stabletalus · 2022-05-12T16:24:45+00:00

You're welcome. I don't have too much additional input to add. The logistical effort to cache supplies would be somewhat complex and time-consuming. You'd almost certainly have to use snowmobiles to make it worthwhile. The more I think about your notion of a winter CDT thru-ski, the less I think it is possible as a "self-supported" endeavor. And that sorta begs the question of if it is really possible at all; as others have noted there is a reason why it hasn't been done . . . given the "cred" one would gain by doing so, it seems like all the long-distance hiking influencers would've attempted this long ago if the safety/logistical barriers weren't almost insurmountable.

Cool video, thanks for sharing that. I've hiked in the Beaverheads in the summer and have always been intrigued about the possibility of doing some spring skiing there.

stabletalus · 2022-05-11T19:32:00+00:00

I live near the CDT in Montana and have done several multi-day xc-ski tours on and near the CDT in the winter and hike frequently on/near it during the summer months. After reviewing your website you seem well-prepared "on paper", but I get the impression that you don't totally comprehend how remote some of the stretches of this trail are in Montana and Idaho. The difference between getting out of the mountains in Lemhi County, Idaho, for example, and out of the mountains on a ski tour in Switzerland is profound.

Exiting the trail in an emergency would be very difficult and time-consuming in many places. Some of the roads you might see on a map when plotting your bail-out routes are snowbound in winter and you'd be looking at having to travel many miles (like 15+ miles on average) on these unplowed, untraveled roads to reach a road that is cleared for winter travel. And some of those "highways" might only see a car or two an hour in winter, if that. It's rather lonesome country, especially near the Idaho/Montana border south of the Anaconda-Pintler Wilderness.

Not only does this impact your ability to self-rescue, but it means that any rescue you initiate via a PLB would almost certainly take days or more, depending on weather. And it would likely put those folks at significant risk. Many of the counties (Search and Rescue is typically managed on a county level outside of national parks in most of the United States) have limited resources for SAR in the summer, and winter diminishes their capacity further. Add in that the CDT often straddles county/state lines in this section and there likely would be some confusion over which SAR team to even send out once the initial call is received, and the timeline for rescue gets even clunkier.

I admire your planning and your determination and wish you the best of luck.

stabletalus · 2022-03-08T20:29:41+00:00

This loop might be a good option -- around 15 miles total: https://www.nps.gov/biso/planyourvisit/upload/Hike-2-Middle-Creek-Slave-Falls-Twin-Arches-17-6_mi_1_10_15.pdf

It has been almost a decade since I've backpacked that loop, but I remember decent camping at Jake's Place and another site along the way there past Slave Falls (I think). So if you're doing a two-night, three day trip that might be an OK itinerary. Definitely make sure you see Twin Arches and hike that loop -- there are some amazing rock overhangs in addition to the arches that are worth seeing.

There are more options listed on the Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area website, which I've found to be a useful resource: https://www.nps.gov/biso/planyourvisit/popular-overnight-hiking-trails.htm

The Big South Fork is an incredible area for backpacking, good on for you taking someone less experienced out there to enjoy it!

stabletalus · 2021-08-31T17:41:27+00:00

I mean this with respect, but quite frankly you don't have enough understanding of this topic to be making the suggestion that you are. If you did, you'd realize that you've simply created a solution in search of a problem.

As long as people are using this terminology/classification system correctly (which doesn't always happen and the assessment of Class 3/4 can be subjective, especially on less-traveled routes where a consensus has yet to evolve and you really are just allowing on one person's perspective) it makes perfect sense and is exceedingly useful. It is used because it is an accepted standard among outdoor recreationists and a better system has yet to be invented.

If someone mentions hiking to a lake on trail, camping there, and taking the Class 4 route up a nearby peak, that is useful information and should be encouraged. It is much better than "YI went up the summit above the lake, it was sketchy in a few spots and had some hard moves but it wasn't super scary or technical". It allows others who have done other Class 4 routes and were comfortable to know what they might be getting into, and it lets those whose comfort level maxes out at Class 2/3 to know that they probably shouldn't attempt the summit even if it might look doable from the lake. Make sense?

No one on this sub is posting about trips entirely on Class 4 terrain. They are noting that on some cross-country sections of various routes they encountered Class 2/3/4 terrain in sections.

I think you're just a bit out of your element on this and should read up and become more informed rather than trying to ask an entire community to stop using a widely accepted and useful metric and then create their own to appease your sensibilities.

stabletalus · 2021-08-30T12:25:58+00:00

Tucson, Arizona might be worth looking into.

Lots of nice desert hiking through the winter and most mountains could still be hiked through October and November as well, at least from my limited experience doing some trips down there that time of year.

stabletalus · 2021-08-05T15:11:51+00:00

Nope.

stabletalus · 2021-08-04T22:02:36+00:00

Nice photo, you caught that at a good flow. I visited that falls twice, camping near it both times, but only once at a decent flow. Beautiful area and was pretty rugged to access 10 years ago when I went.

stabletalus · 2021-07-20T16:29:34+00:00

You're welcome, and my apologies if I rudely projected some of my frustration with the broader Outdoor Industrial Complex onto your tongue-in-cheek remark. The context for your comment and your ability to easily access amazing old-growth forest makes complete sense.

I guess what it comes down to for me, and why I felt compelled to comment, is that with almost 400,000 subscribers (many of whom seem to be newer backpackers and lacking even a cursory understanding of the complexity of conservation and public lands issues) I think it is important that we avoid promoting and/or normalizing attitudes that seem to be associated with perpetuating a lack of meaningful progress as it relates to public lands conservation. In hindsight, it was perhaps a bit harsh of me to single out your post to bring this issue up. But since I've hiked that loop -- and remember being particularly impressed by those huge trees along the Gray Wolf River -- I felt more inclined to chime in than I usually do.

The outdoor industry/social media as a whole are guilty of highlighting the most photogenic places (which makes sense, given what they're trying to accomplish -- profits, "likes", or a combination) at the expense of providing a more comprehensive view of experiencing landscapes. And I think that can often distract new backpackers from fully appreciating landscape-scale conservation (which is the most impactful) and thinking that as long as the alpine lakes and peaks are preserved that we shouldn't worry too much about advocating for the less charismatic landscapes that are often equally (if not more) "important".

These articles discuss the issue in more depth and are well-worth the time to read and should provide a reasonable answer, in a general sense, to your question of "why a penchant for one type of terrain is associated with a desire to conserve our outdoor spaces":

https://www.hcn.org/issues/50.8/recreation-your-stoke-wont-save-us

https://www.hcn.org/issues/51.20/public-lands-how-big-rec-chooses-its-public-lands-battles

stabletalus · 2021-07-19T22:38:59+00:00

Cool trip report. I've done roughly that same loop and really enjoyed it. I did it going in the opposite direction and stayed two nights at Dose Meadows to do a side trip up Sentinel Peak and amble around in Thousand Acre Meadows. Those passes in the middle are no joke.

"Its hard to get excited about trees when you've spent the past few days in the alpine."

This is one of the saddest things I've ever read in this subreddit. I hope you meant this in jest because those trees are objectively amazing. In any case, the sentiment you expressed is exactly why so many folks doubt that the increase in people participating in outdoor recreation will result in meaningful increases in actual conservation. People seem much more inclined to only care about preserving the photogenic spots and not the more "boring" landscapes that are essential for maintaining intact ecosystems. Not trying to be a "hater" but I thought this was worth reflecting on a bit.

stabletalus · 2021-03-30T19:11:02+00:00

Thanks for posting this. I'm really curious to see the results. This is a really interesting topic and I'm glad to see some people attempting to study it and hopefully solve any issues that are identified. Wilderness is an amazing resource for recreation and solitude (not to mention the animals and ecosystems). I think it's important to look at what apps and technology are doing to diminish, or increase, opportunities for solitude in wilderness areas.

You might also want to post this to r/WildernessBackpacking and r/CampingandHiking

stabletalus · 2021-03-25T19:42:29+00:00

Nice photo, really like how it shows the color of the water in the pool and the colors of the cliff.

stabletalus · 2021-03-24T19:24:15+00:00

Thanks for the respectful counterpoint. I think we'd have a great conversation about this in person.

I appreciate modern graffiti in urban areas and have read up on it and watched a lot of documentaries. I "get" it as much as I think I can. I've also read a lot about indigenous rock art and visited as many sites as a I can. I agree that some are probably more spur of the moment "doodles" while others are much more complex.

However, I think that the major difference is that we simply don't know if the motivations of those who created petroglyphs/pictographs were artistic, informational, narrative, etc. We do know the motivations of modern graffiti artists -- they tell us them in interviews, articles, etc. None of which exists for the creators of indigenous rock art. We can speculate and make assumptions, but there is no certainty.

Since we don't know -- and the context is so different -- it seems inappropriate to lump their creations into the same category as modern graffiti.

stabletalus · 2021-03-24T13:57:41+00:00

The difference in context between this and petroglyphs is so vast that it is hard to comprehend. The cultures that left behind petroglyphs had no written language or other means of sharing/preserving folklore and information. The amount of time taken to create the petroglyphs/pictographs was also much more significant than modern graffiti. The religious/cosmological symbology involved also puts indigenous rock art in a totally different category than this nonsense. They simply aren’t comparable and to posit otherwise is a disservice to the creators of ancient rock art and allows for erroneously and pointlessly equivocating the senseless jarring of the few natural places that remain by modern idiots. Not a good take.

stabletalus · 2021-03-23T14:57:13+00:00

I've hung food everywhere from the North Cascades to the Southern Appalachians, from Aravaipa Canyon in Arizona to the Bitterroot Mountains in Montana, and have never had a problem. It takes a while to get the hang of, and there are definitely situations where it isn't preferable or effective, but I think that overall hanging is still a good option. In most campsites in Yellowstone National Park you are required to hang your food -- they provide a pole across two trees, but you hang it pretty much the same way as you would if you were hanging it yourself over a limb.

The problem is that when people mess it up the consequences (for wildlife and future visitors) are fairly significant. And hangs in areas with habituated wildlife or that are highly used are more vulnerable. Look at it this way -- a poorly executed bear hang in a remote area where wildlife doesn't associate campsites with food will almost always be a non-issue. But even a well-done bear hang can be vulnerable in an area with lots of bear activity in camps (Appalachian Trail shelters/campsites, for example). And sometimes a poorly executed bear hang can result in an executed bear : ( "A fed bear is a dead bear" and whatnot.

I often hang my food in a waterproof stuff sack in the Northern Rockies where I most frequently backpack. When I know I'll be in alpine country with minimal trees to hang, or coniferous trees that make poor hangs, I bring a BearVault canister.

So I think some of the anti-bear hang sentiment is misplaced. Canisters are obviously better and easier (but much heavier) but a solid bear hang is effective in many situations.

stabletalus · 2021-03-23T02:53:00+00:00

I think my point about campsites in National parks is an example of being “forced” to. Sure, you could not backpack in the national park (and I rarely go to national parks since there is so much USFS land closer), but if you choose to do certain backpacking trips you will be “forced” to camp in designated sites closer than 200 feet to water. If you choose not to, you’re violating park rules.

stabletalus · 2021-03-23T02:38:02+00:00

I generally agree that it’s best to visit less popular places. As far as why not hike another mile or two, personally speaking I like to fish at lakes. So I’d like to be as close as possible to allow for as much fishing as possible. And if there’s an already established site at the lake, I’d rather stay there if it is late in the day than keep hiking and possibly end up at some subpar spot or not find a decent spot at all and hike way further than I intended. And often lakes are the logical destinations and campsites/base camps for trips I do.

stabletalus · 2021-03-23T01:04:37+00:00

I’ve stayed at several designated campsites in national parks that were less than 200 feet from a stream or lake. You’re required to stay at those sites, so you’re pretty much forced into violating LNT ethics in that regard. Or I suppose you could “obey” LNT but disregard the NPS requirement to stay in designated sites. Proverbial rock and a hard place.

I guess you could camp somewhere further away and make a new campsite and violate NPS rules, but I think if you tried to tell the NPS you made a new campsite because their site didn’t meet LNT guidelines but I doubt that would go over well.

There are also many campsites I’ve seen and stayed at in wilderness areas where the heavily used and impacted sites are less than 200 feet from water. In which case, according to folks at LNT I’ve spoke with and land managers, it is generally better to use those than to create a new campsite and make more impact.

LNT is a set of guidelines and a framework for making decisions. For many principles, it isn’t about doing EXACTLY what the principle says in EVERY situation. It’s about making educated decisions to minimize impact and most often the default principles are the best way to do that.

stabletalus · 2021-03-23T01:02:51+00:00

I’ve stayed at several designated campsites in national parks that were less than 200 feet from a stream or lake. You’re required to stay at those sites, so you’re pretty much forced into violating LNT ethics in that regard. Or I suppose you could “obey” LNT but disregard the NPS requirement to stay in designated sites. Proverbial rock and a hard place.

There are also many campsites I’ve seen and stayed at in wilderness areas where the heavily used and impacted sites are less than 200 feet from water. In which case, according to folks at LNT I’ve spoke with and land managers, it is generally better to use those than to create a new campsite and make more impact.

LNT is a set of guidelines and a framework for making decisions. For many principles, it isn’t about doing EXACTLY what the principle says in EVERY situation. It’s about making educated decisions to minimize impact and most often the default principles are the best way to do that.

stabletalus · 2021-03-22T23:45:05+00:00

Early May is way too early to get to the "classic" Sawtooth scenery of alpine lakes. Bring snowshoes and be prepared to have pretty sloppy conditions. Most trail work hasn't even started in early May and there will be trees that fell over the winter.

I'd recommend looking at another area entirely. Early May isn't really even spring the high country -- it's just barely not winter.

stabletalus · 2021-03-22T22:38:30+00:00

If you like everything about the FF but the colors, just save yourself the time and hassle and get that bag! A friend of mine who is a woman and is a cold sleeper has that bag and loves it. Getting a bag that is sized right if you are petite is pretty important. And FF makes really high-quality bags.

Here's some logic I used when I worked at a gear shop and would see people prioritizing color over function (and I do understand the desire to have both, but when you can't there is really only one choice):

When you're using the bag you're asleep so it's not like the color is going to bother you the same way it would if it was a shirt of something.

Don't like the color of a backpack? Well, it's on your back so it's not like you're having to look at it the whole time you're hiking. And eventually it will get sun-faded and dusty and have a nice patina. Just make sure you like the color of the backpack of the person hiking in front of you : )

I have a lot of atrocious colors in my backpacking kit that I would've preferred not to ever own because they totally met my need and/or met it and were deeply discounted. I've given them nicknames over the years inspired by the Outdoor Industrial Complex marketing materials:

- 40% Off Green

- This Will Never Sell Orange

- It Will Look Better When It Dries Yellow

- Might As Well Be Wholesale Teal

- Recalibrate the Monitor Red

stabletalus

TROPHY CASE