Location, Astronomy, Protection, and Location

(Inspired by the females in amateur astronomy thread)
The issue of protection while observing is relative.
It's relative to location and location.

Rural Wyoming is a different world than urban New York.
Most remote sites lie between the extremes.

Many drive miles to remote sites.
But not all such sites are equal in their remoteness.

Some remote sites are subject to law enforcement patrols.
Some are subject to invasion by thrill seekers, the party crowd, etc.

Some are borderline remote.
Far enough from most people to be mostly isolated.
Close enough to warrant an awareness toward possible intruders.

Other sites are remote in a Wyoming sense of the word --
You will see no other human life forms.
You will hear no sounds from manmade machinery or vehicles.
There will be no lights from motorized vehicles.
No lights from un-natural sources --
Excepting those you brought with you.

It's possible to camp out for days in a "real" remote site
Without detecting any signs of the civilized world,
Excepting perhaps a rare sighting of an isolated aircraft
High overhead -- and satellites at night.
(One can never escape the satellites!)

What about dogs?
Dogs are good at barking at bears,
They *attract* bears to your location!
I don't take a dog with me to remote sites.
For other locations a dog might make a fine companion.

Coyotes:
Who cares?
They present no real danger
Not even toward a 'lone' adult human.
Their singing can be a welcomed break to the silence.

Firearms?
They have their place.
They have their practical
(and recreational) uses.
But they're definitely *not* for everyone!
They're *not* appropriate for all observing sites.

There are no absolutes in the world of protection.
In some locations friendly human companionship will suffice.
In some locations one may observe alone, unarmed, in perfect safety.
A canine companion can be a welcomed companion in some locations.
Yet there are locations where a firearm can be appropriate;
But not for all people, and not for all locations.

Those from one location
Should not be quick in condemning the
Protective measures taken by others in other locations.
The people of sci-astro-amateur live in widely varying locations.

Bill Greer

Those from one location

Should not be quick in condemning the

Protective measures taken by others in
other locations. The people of
sci-astro-amateur live in widely varying
locations.

Bill Greer

A well thought out post, Bill. The best protective device is really
one's head.
Marty

Bill Greer wrote in message . ..

Those from one location
Should not be quick in condemning the
Protective measures taken by others in other locations.
The people of sci-astro-amateur live in widely varying locations.

True enough. But in my experience, most of the variation is in
people's subjective reactions, not in their objective realities.

But then, one might ask, so what if it is subjective? Does that
make it any less real? Fear is counterproductive to good
observing, just as being cold is counterproductive.

The only difference is that if the fear is irrational, there is
at least some hope of overcoming it by internal discipline rather
than by changing the external circumstances. As a former mountain
climber, I have spent a lot of time doing that. The key to being
a good climber is to make fear your friend rather than your
enemy, to learn to distinguish between rational fears and irrational
fears, to listen very carefully to the rational fears without being
paralyzed by the irrational fears.

In my experience, most Americans live in fear much more than they
should, and their lives suffer accordingly. People were much bolder
when I was a child, and I see no evidence at all that it is the
realities that have changed -- I think that the change is almost
entirely in attitude.

- Tony Flanders

(Tony Flanders) wrote in message ...
Those from one location
Should not be quick in condemning the
Protective measures taken by others in other locations.
The people of sci-astro-amateur live in widely varying locations.

True enough. But in my experience, most of the variation is in
people's subjective reactions...
In my experience, most Americans live in fear much more than they
should, and their lives suffer accordingly. People were much bolder
when I was a child...

Provincial naivete. "Most Americans" live completely outside your
experince (and are much bolder than you).

Of course, this does not detract from the appreciation that saa has
for your agonized efforts at analyzing the aspects of amateur
astronomy which interest you.

In article ,
says...

Those from one location
Should not be quick in condemning the
Protective measures taken by others in other locations.
The people of sci-astro-amateur live in widely varying locations.

Bill Greer

Bill, Nicely put Sir.

In 25 years of remote site observing (mostly solo) here in Australia I've
only ever had a couple of events that were remotely approaching what I'd
call dangerous. In each case it was drunken louts who were more curious
than agressive and a bit of chat, and a closely supervised look through
the scope calmed them down and they soon left me alone.

It's also fair to say that I've had some fantastic times out observing
solo, especially when I've had "visitors" from local towns and farms show
up unannounced to have a look through the telescope. That alone offsets
any potential dangers as far as I'm concerned.

Ian

"Ian W" wrote in message
. ..

In 25 years of remote site observing (mostly solo) here in Australia I've
only ever had a couple of events that were remotely approaching what I'd
call dangerous. In each case it was drunken louts who were more curious
than agressive and a bit of chat, and a closely supervised look through
the scope calmed them down and they soon left me alone.
[SNIP]

Ian,

One of our dark sites has, in the past, been the site of the roving high
school weekend beer party. Our presence has pretty much put an end to it -
they see a bunch of cars and telescopes and go elsewhere. (I suspect they
have found a less traveled location, as they have not been seen in recent
years.)

Actually, one group of young ladies pulled in one night and got out of their
car before realizing it wasn't a beer party. A pretty dazed group when one
of our friendly observers invited them over to look through his scope.
Actually, one turned out to be interested in what we were doing - but they
didn't stay long.

My one encounter with drunks was actually in my front yard at my parent's
house. They apparently noticed the telecope, and one of the crew wanted to
look. Aside from having trouble standing up, he appreciaed the chance to
look through a scope. As I think about this, I realize that we are far, far
more likely to have unexpected company in our front yard than out at one of
our remote observing sites.

Clear skies, Alan