A very strange thing occurred in Nova Scotia this past week. A hiker was not only attacked but mauled so badly by coyotes that she eventually died, in spite of getting relatively quick medical attention. (See CBC article at: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091028/national/ns_coyote_attack) This is amazing in that coyotes are naturally timid and not the first animal one would think of when one would thing of dangers you can meet on the trail. The Eastern Coyote is bigger (and now apparently meaner) than his western cousins as it is morphing into a replacement for the extirpated wolf, but still, if I had a dollar for every coyote I've seen in the woods yet never have I seen one act mean...
Still, it demonstrates that one should not wander totally unarmed in the wild. No, I don't recommend people running out to get AA-12 assault shotguns or 44 mag. sidearms. In most places and (especially in a Canadian National Park where all firearms are banned), these are illegal, and besides, they would take too long to bring to bear (but yes, would be effective if ever by some miracle you could get to use them). What I would suggest is that a good belt knife. especially a large bush knife, machete, or even a sturdy solid wood or metal walking stick (that could have been used as a club) or any such simple, legal device she could have carried and used to hurt her attackers would probably have saved this talented young woman's life by deterring the predators. Predators go for the weak and infirm. They generally don't like it when you fight back. Even large predators like bears have been known to back off it a proper counter-attack can be mounted. We usually get the benefit of the doubt because we walk upright and therefore look huge to a normal quadruped but I think that didn't happen in this case.
These were animals who live in a national park visited by hundreds of thousands of (often clueless) people each and every year. They probably ate garbage and stole people's lunches since they were pups. Tourists probably tried to get close to take "nice" pictures. They were undoubtedly no longer afraid of humans because of their size. They were never hurt by humans because the national park policy in Canada is not to control animals unless they prove to be a danger to life and limb. No hunting or trapping to connect to the sight and smell of humans. The forest in the Highlands National Park is relatively mature as I remember it from my last run through and, (policy again), is being left to grow older, therefore small game is probably relatively rare. If you're down to bringing down moose for dinner, a human female is probably not too scary, I figure.
Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the system....
I look forward to your ideas....
Clurrie
"Be careful out there, there are things that want to hurt you!"
On 2009-11-01, Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
> Still, it demonstrates that one should not wander totally unarmed in the > wild.
...
> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout > might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for > defense against such threats?
Arrgh.
There are thousands of ways to die in the backcountry.
You can only carry so much gear, so what you want to do is try to cover the mostly likely ways you're gonna die.
In the continental US backcountry, fatal animal attacks, particularly ones that a weapon can help prevent, are *very* rare.
Death by hypothermia or dehydration, depending on the environment, is infinitely more common.
If you have available carrying capacity, more layers, more fast-burning carbs, and more water are the usual things to bring along if you want to increase your survival chances.
Weapons are so far down the list that I don't know anyone who carries one, apart from tools like ice axes and trekking poles that incidentally could be used as weapons.
BTW, if you want to make the scout's life better, give them trekking poles. The things are worth more than their weight and, if you really are a bed-wetter type and fantasize that weapons in the backcountry have some utility, poles are prolly about the most useful thing you could carry for interacting with critters.
In article <4aeceac5$0$5343$9a566...@news.aliant.net>,
Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote: > Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout > might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for > defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new > reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they > evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the system....
> I look forward to your ideas....
I have carried my Alaskan Bush Knife for the last 5 decades when out in the bush, and I am sure it would suffice, for any protection needed from this type of attack. I also liked Wolf's Trekking Poles... I have a Brother-in-Law that kept a cougar at bay with an Ice Axe... similar situation and tool....
-- Bruce in alaska add <path> after <fast> to reply
Wolf Leverich wrote: > On 2009-11-01, Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>> Still, it demonstrates that one should not wander totally unarmed in the >> wild.
> ... >> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout >> might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for >> defense against such threats?
> Arrgh.
> There are thousands of ways to die in the backcountry.
> You can only carry so much gear, so what you want to do > is try to cover the mostly likely ways you're gonna die.
> In the continental US backcountry, fatal animal attacks, > particularly ones that a weapon can help prevent, are > *very* rare.
> Death by hypothermia or dehydration, depending on the > environment, is infinitely more common.
> If you have available carrying capacity, more layers, more > fast-burning carbs, and more water are the usual things to > bring along if you want to increase your survival chances.
I agree wholeheartedly. Don't understand your frustration with the question, though. True, animal attacks are rare and somewhere way down on my list (way down). But then, I grew up in the country and used to play in the woods before I started school. Most people are now more or less "city folks". The point is, you're going to bring some kind of tools/accessories. My question is, would there be a preference of one over another because one could function as an improvised weapon of defense against such a (rare) occurrence. Note that woman had greater probability of having problems with hypothermia, dehydration, etc. but I bet that didn't matter when the improbable happened and the coyotes attacked. In her place and AT THAT POINT, I would have traded all my polar fleece for something I could beat the beasts over the head with....
> Weapons are so far down the list that I don't know anyone > who carries one, apart from tools like ice axes and trekking > poles that incidentally could be used as weapons.
That's my point, exactly. I just wondered if someone had ideas of preferable tools over others. I certainly have my ideas. I used the example of the boy scout to ward off at least some of the unavoidable posts suggesting a firearm (which I also noted as being ill-advised in my post, you'll remember).
> BTW, if you want to make the scout's life better, give them > trekking poles. The things are worth more than their weight > and, if you really are a bed-wetter type and fantasize that > weapons in the backcountry have some utility, poles are prolly > about the most useful thing you could carry for interacting > with critters.
Now, trekking (or "walking") poles are loved by millions. I never have used one, finding them awkward (hate to always have something in my hands when I walk - but maybe that'll change some day). When crossing over ice or deep snow they're essential but otherwise, I don't know it depends on who you talk to. They would, I agree, be a very useful improvised weapon (especially since they'll probably be in you hand when something decides you look like they're next meal)...
Bruce in alaska wrote: > In article <4aeceac5$0$5343$9a566...@news.aliant.net>, > Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout >> might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for >> defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new >> reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they >> evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the system....
>> I look forward to your ideas....
> I have carried my Alaskan Bush Knife for the last 5 decades when out > in the bush, and I am sure it would suffice, for any protection needed > from this type of attack. I also liked Wolf's Trekking Poles... I have > a Brother-in-Law that kept a cougar at bay with an Ice Axe... similar > situation and tool....
I too carry a bush knife for over a decade (one that I made myself see http://clurrie.150m.com/Knives/NouveauCoureurDesBoisPage.html if you're curious). Although I think it's worth more than many tools twice its weight and could be an awesome defensive weapon in the unlikely event of an attack, I realize that not everyone will be comfortable carrying one. I don't see me voluntarily going in the wilderness without it, but many are intimidated by its size and weight. I believe it's a tool that can protect you from the really usual dangers and the unusual ones too...
Clurrie "Be careful out there, there are things that can hurt you"
Clurrie wrote: > Bruce in alaska wrote: >> In article <4aeceac5$0$5343$9a566...@news.aliant.net>, >> Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old >>> scout might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike >>> for defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new >>> reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they >>> evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the >>> system....
>>> I look forward to your ideas....
>> I have carried my Alaskan Bush Knife for the last 5 decades when out >> in the bush, and I am sure it would suffice, for any protection needed >> from this type of attack. I also liked Wolf's Trekking Poles... I have >> a Brother-in-Law that kept a cougar at bay with an Ice Axe... similar >> situation and tool....
> I too carry a bush knife for over a decade (one that I made myself see > http://clurrie.150m.com/Knives/NouveauCoureurDesBoisPage.html if you're > curious). Although I think it's worth more than many tools twice its > weight and could be an awesome defensive weapon in the unlikely event of > an attack, I realize that not everyone will be comfortable carrying one. > I don't see me voluntarily going in the wilderness without it, but many > are intimidated by its size and weight. I believe it's a tool that can > protect you from the really usual dangers and the unusual ones too...
> Clurrie > "Be careful out there, there are things that can hurt you"
Neat stuff, but I think you should look at the page you referenced above. There is a google ad that moves with the page and covers part of your text. Since your text flows with soft returns, there is no way to move the ad off the text.
VtSkier wrote: > Clurrie wrote: >> Bruce in alaska wrote: >>> In article <4aeceac5$0$5343$9a566...@news.aliant.net>, >>> Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old >>>> scout might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike >>>> for defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a >>>> new reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as >>>> they evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from >>>> the system....
>>>> I look forward to your ideas....
>>> I have carried my Alaskan Bush Knife for the last 5 decades when out >>> in the bush, and I am sure it would suffice, for any protection >>> needed from this type of attack. I also liked Wolf's Trekking >>> Poles... I have >>> a Brother-in-Law that kept a cougar at bay with an Ice Axe... similar >>> situation and tool....
>> I too carry a bush knife for over a decade (one that I made myself see >> http://clurrie.150m.com/Knives/NouveauCoureurDesBoisPage.html if >> you're curious). Although I think it's worth more than many tools >> twice its weight and could be an awesome defensive weapon in the >> unlikely event of an attack, I realize that not everyone will be >> comfortable carrying one. I don't see me voluntarily going in the >> wilderness without it, but many are intimidated by its size and >> weight. I believe it's a tool that can protect you from the really >> usual dangers and the unusual ones too...
>> Clurrie >> "Be careful out there, there are things that can hurt you"
> Neat stuff, but I think you should look at the page > you referenced above. There is a google ad that moves > with the page and covers part of your text. Since your > text flows with soft returns, there is no way to move > the ad off the text.
Right. Sorry about that. The annoyances of having to go to a free hosting site... If you reload, the ad changes and you usually don't get the same annoyance twice. Again, my apologies.... I sorta got shunted there when my AOL site closed down their server without notice and now, the search engines have started picking me up.... Drats!
Clurrie
"Be careful out there, there are things that can hurt you!"
This is the first time an adult has been reported killed by coyotes. Its about one a year for bears, one every five years for mountains lions, 40 per year for domestic dogs, 40 per year for lightning, 600 auto- deer accidents.
rick++ wrote: > This is the first time an adult has been reported killed by coyotes. > Its about one a year for bears, one every five years for mountains > lions, > 40 per year for domestic dogs, 40 per year for lightning, 600 auto- > deer accidents.
> The last three may be worth worrying about.
I'm sure it won't stop me from going into the woods (dogs, lightning and deer on the road don't do much to stop me from doing things, but I do take precautions like not playing golf or hiding under solitary trees during thunderstorms, not ignoring large, aggressive dogs and watching for the telltale signs of animals about to climb into the roadway from the shoulder while driving country roads). I also intend, when my turn comes, to take the H1N1 vaccine, even though it hasn't yet become another version of the Spanish flu. I wash my hands often and take my vitamins like the doctors say to - just in case. I know some people are going to ask me what should be done to be ready if something like this and I'd like to have a thought-out, reasonable answer to give them. Like I said in my original post, I don't think a firearm or any such "extra" is a reasonable approach, but I'm sure experienced backcountry people have thought of "what-if" scenarios. I know I have.
So far, we've come up with a walking sick (or trekking pole) and a bush knife as equipment that could easily and practically be used to try and dissuade a rogue animal from using you as their main course for the next meal. Interestingly, these were what came to my mind at first... Now, an ice axe was also mentioned and that I had not though of, not being an ice climber... Interesting, though. Anyways, I will appreciate any reasonable suggestion. I think it's one of those things you kinda work over in your mind once in a while when the trail gets long and boring... :O)
Clurrie
"The trail is long, the going tough, but the spirits high"
Clurrie wrote: > Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout > might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for > defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new > reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they > evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the > system....
A 12-year-old scout might want to enjoy the wonderful, unusual experience of seeing a coyote. The danger of getting fatally mauled is many orders of magnitude less than the danger of getting hit by a car crossing the street -- or of drowning in a bathtub, for that matter.
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:24:18 -0400, Clurrie wrote: > rick++ wrote: >> This is the first time an adult has been reported killed by coyotes. >> Its about one a year for bears, one every five years for mountains >> lions, >> 40 per year for domestic dogs, 40 per year for lightning, 600 auto- >> deer accidents.
>> The last three may be worth worrying about.
> I'm sure it won't stop me from going into the woods (dogs, lightning and > deer on the road don't do much to stop me from doing things, but I do > take precautions like not playing golf or hiding under solitary trees > during thunderstorms, not ignoring large, aggressive dogs and watching > for the telltale signs of animals about to climb into the roadway from > the shoulder while driving country roads). I also intend, when my turn > comes, to take the H1N1 vaccine, even though it hasn't yet become > another version of the Spanish flu. I wash my hands often and take my > vitamins like the doctors say to - just in case. I know some people are > going to ask me what should be done to be ready if something like this > and I'd like to have a thought-out, reasonable answer to give them. Like > I said in my original post, I don't think a firearm or any such "extra" > is a reasonable approach, but I'm sure experienced backcountry people > have thought of "what-if" scenarios. I know I have.
> So far, we've come up with a walking sick (or trekking pole) and a bush > knife as equipment that could easily and practically be used to try and > dissuade a rogue animal from using you as their main course for the next > meal. Interestingly, these were what came to my mind at first... Now, > an ice axe was also mentioned and that I had not though of, not being an > ice climber... Interesting, though. Anyways, I will appreciate any > reasonable suggestion. I think it's one of those things you kinda work > over in your mind once in a while when the trail gets long and boring... > :O)
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:52:38 -0800, Ben Crowell wrote: > Clurrie wrote: >> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout >> might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for >> defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new >> reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they >> evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the >> system....
> A 12-year-old scout might want to enjoy the wonderful, unusual > experience of seeing a coyote.
I don't feel like I'm really camping unless the coyotes sing me to sleep. They won't come up to a tent or get anywhere near an established campsite, but if I lie down out in the open and am very still they'll sometimes come within 50 feet for just a few seconds. Once their curiosity is satisfied they're outta there, and that's it for the night.
> The danger of getting fatally mauled is many orders of magnitude less > than the danger of getting hit by a car crossing the street -- or of > drowning in a bathtub, for that matter.
And the very few serious wild-animal attacks that do happen in the lower 48 each year are almost always the human's fault and they're usually sudden, unexpected, incredibly violent events allowing no opportunity to reach for a weapon. A little common sense and a few simple precautions go farther than weaponry here, but my experience has been that those with the overconfidence of weapons are the least likely to bear-bag their food, etc.
> "A bear killed two militants after discovering them in its den in > Indian-administered Kashmir, police say."
> "Two other militants escaped, one of them badly wounded, after the attack > in Kulgam district, south of Srinagar."
> "The militants were armed with AK-46s but were taken by surprise - police > found the remains of pudding they had made to eat when the bear > attacked."
> I guess the bear didn't have room for dessert. :-)
Sonny, can you tell us ALL, Just what kind of firearm is an AK-46?????
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks.........
On Oct 31, 6:53 pm, Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout > might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for > defense against such threats?
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:14:03 -0900, You wrote: > In article <DbOdnX1ex5fL2W3XnZ2dnUVZ_hudn...@supernews.com>, > pbj <postittothenewsgr...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> "A bear killed two militants after discovering them in its den in >> Indian-administered Kashmir, police say."
>> "Two other militants escaped, one of them badly wounded, after the >> attack in Kulgam district, south of Srinagar."
>> "The militants were armed with AK-46s but were taken by surprise - >> police found the remains of pudding they had made to eat when the bear >> attacked."
>> I guess the bear didn't have room for dessert. :-)
> Sonny, can you tell us ALL, Just what kind of firearm is an AK-46?????
Precursor to the AK-47. ISTR that the AK-46 was the prototype and then after field trials some final tweaks were made and it was rev'd up to AK-47. I don't think all that many were made. Wonder if those guys had originals or copies some local craftsman made out of old car parts?
> Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks.........
I don't know which is dumber: Cooking dinner in a bear's den, or cooking dinner in a bear's den and not having someone on watch at all times with the first round chambered and the safety off.
pbj wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:52:38 -0800, Ben Crowell wrote:
>> Clurrie wrote: >>> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout >>> might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for >>> defense against such threats? This may be the thin edge of a new >>> reality where animals that have not become more of a threat as they >>> evolve to replace others we humans thoughtlessly removed from the >>> system.... >> A 12-year-old scout might want to enjoy the wonderful, unusual >> experience of seeing a coyote.
> I don't feel like I'm really camping unless the coyotes sing me to > sleep. They won't come up to a tent or get anywhere near an established > campsite, but if I lie down out in the open and am very still they'll > sometimes come within 50 feet for just a few seconds. Once their > curiosity is satisfied they're outta there, and that's it for the night.
>> The danger of getting fatally mauled is many orders of magnitude less >> than the danger of getting hit by a car crossing the street -- or of >> drowning in a bathtub, for that matter.
> And the very few serious wild-animal attacks that do happen in the lower > 48 each year are almost always the human's fault and they're usually > sudden, unexpected, incredibly violent events allowing no opportunity to > reach for a weapon. A little common sense and a few simple precautions > go farther than weaponry here, but my experience has been that those > with the overconfidence of weapons are the least likely to bear-bag > their food, etc.
This woman was apparently a veteran hiker and knowledgeable in the ways of the wilderness. Maybe I shouldn't take it on faith that she didn't mess up in a very basic way. I understood she was out for a relatively short hike, seeing that she was on tour (she was a musician) and only had a short time for a walk so probably didn't have a lot of food and gear... Did she panic and start to run? Did she have a badly wrapped meat sandwich which the coyotes figured should be theirs? I don't know. I do know she was alone and obviously unable to dissuade her attackers. My personal feeling is that, had she been able to whack the coyotes over the head with a trekking pole, cut them with a knife or smack them in the ribs with an improvised club like an ice-axe, her attackers would have thought better of continuing with this hunt and would have elected to pursue other, easier game. She might still have been hurt, but maybe not enough to die.
While it is true that the incidents of animal attacks are rare and that your chance of being in such a position is small, I remind myself that the likelihood of such a thing happening to you goes up quite a bit when you get off the couch and go into the wild where the animals are. We plan on what to do in case of lightning, avalanches mud slides (which have little chance of actually killing you, statistically), we plan and pack for freak accidents of all sorts. I'm kinda partial to the Scout motto: "Be Prepared". Note, it doesn't say for what... The coyotes didn't kill with one bite. Dog-like animals don't work like that, usually. They kill by opening arteries and bleeding their prey out. There would probably have been time to strike back after (maybe even before) the original attack. But you need something to strike back with.... I just wondered what would possibly be useful....
Clurrie
"Be careful out there, there are thing that can hurt you"
Clurrie wrote: > I'm kinda partial to the Scout > motto: "Be Prepared".
Next time I see a coyote, I'd love to be prepared with a camera. If not, then I'd like to be prepared with some knowledge of coyotes that would help me to be a good observer and understand what I'm seeing.
If you want to be prepared for a life-threatening attack by a large mammal, the best preparation is probably to learn defensive driving against people driving SUVs while yakking on their cell phones.
> Wolf Leverich wrote: >> On 2009-11-01, Clurrie <clur...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Still, it demonstrates that one should not wander totally unarmed in the >>> wild.
>> ... >>> Does anybody have some other good weapons that,say, a 12 year old scout >>> might realistically and legally bring on his or her next hike for >>> defense against such threats?
>> Arrgh.
>> There are thousands of ways to die in the backcountry.
>> You can only carry so much gear, so what you want to do >> is try to cover the mostly likely ways you're gonna die.
>> In the continental US backcountry, fatal animal attacks, >> particularly ones that a weapon can help prevent, are >> *very* rare.
>> Death by hypothermia or dehydration, depending on the >> environment, is infinitely more common.
>> If you have available carrying capacity, more layers, more >> fast-burning carbs, and more water are the usual things to >> bring along if you want to increase your survival chances.
> I agree wholeheartedly. Don't understand your frustration with the > question, though. True, animal attacks are rare and somewhere way down > on my list (way down). But then, I grew up in the country and used to > play in the woods before I started school. Most people are now more or > less "city folks". The point is, you're going to bring some kind of > tools/accessories. My question is, would there be a preference of one > over another because one could function as an improvised weapon of > defense against such a (rare) occurrence. Note that woman had greater > probability of having problems with hypothermia, dehydration, etc. but I > bet that didn't matter when the improbable happened and the coyotes > attacked. In her place and AT THAT POINT, I would have traded all my > polar fleece for something I could beat the beasts over the head with....
Of course, but you don't get a memo the day before the outing that says "On tomorrow's trip, your backcountry challenge will be a coyote attack".
What you do know every time you go out in the Lower 48 is that you're something like 1,000 times more likely to die of hypothermia or dehydation than animal attack.
It is irrational and stupid to trade weight that could keep you alive for a boat anchor.
The reason why I harp on this is that I've led hundreds of backcountry group trips, and one of the most irritating problems is getting people to leave the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo (and their microwave) at home, and carry a few extra quarts of water.
In 50 years of backcountry travel I have never seen a use for the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo, let alone the microwave. But I watch somebody get cold or run out of water on every frickin trip.
It's depressingly predictable, because people are not making rational choices with regard to what's gonna keep them alive.
In article <slrnhf8gio.npi.lever...@askin-17.linkpendium.com>, "Wolf Leverich" <lever...@linkpendium.com> wrote:
> It's depressingly predictable, because people are not making > rational choices with regard to what's gonna keep them alive.
> Cheers, Wolf.
I suspect that most of these folks just don't have the experience, and therefor their judgments, and choices, are based on other things, rather than experience, rational or not.....
there is a BIG difference, between hiking in the rural American Flatlands east of the Mississippi, and hiking in actual Wilderness Areas, that can be found west of the Mississippi..... Not to mention doing ANY Foot Traveling in the bush of Alaska.... and equipping for such travel in each of these areas, requires different considerations....
-- Bruce in alaska add <path> after <fast> to reply
In article <0051ec28$0$16926$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, Ben Crowell <crowel...@lightSPAMandISmatterEVIL.com> wrote:
> Clurrie wrote: > > I'm kinda partial to the Scout > > motto: "Be Prepared".
> Next time I see a coyote, I'd love to be prepared with a camera. If > not, then I'd like to be prepared with some knowledge of coyotes > that would help me to be a good observer and understand what I'm > seeing.
> If you want to be prepared for a life-threatening attack by a > large mammal, the best preparation is probably to learn defensive > driving against people driving SUVs while yakking on their cell > phones.
You just need to go to where the coyotes live.... I have a small pack that live in my Close Neighborhood (Close = 10 Sq Miles) and have for the last 4 -5 years. I see them about once a month, and their tracks, weekly... They aren't interested in "Me" or my other human Close Neighbors, but they actually hide very well, when our local Wolf Pack comes thru the area, on a 28 Day Winter Routine.... as do most of the other non-human mammals, during the Wolves 2 day Stay, before moving on down the peninsula.
-- Bruce in alaska add <path> after <fast> to reply
Wolf Leverich wrote: > What you do know every time you go out in the Lower 48 is that > you're something like 1,000 times more likely to die of > hypothermia or dehydation than animal attack.
> It is irrational and stupid to trade weight that could keep you > alive for a boat anchor.
> The reason why I harp on this is that I've led hundreds of > backcountry group trips, and one of the most irritating problems > is getting people to leave the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo (and > their microwave) at home, and carry a few extra quarts of water.
> In 50 years of backcountry travel I have never seen a use for > the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo, let alone the microwave. But I > watch somebody get cold or run out of water on every frickin trip.
> It's depressingly predictable, because people are not making > rational choices with regard to what's gonna keep them alive.
I agree 100% with the spirit of your post. OTOH, I want to be grouchy and argumentative about dehydration. Dehydration can kill you fairly quickly compared to, e.g., malnutrition. But people vastly overestimate the need for hydration. The whole thing about needing x liters of water per day is an urban folktale of the same ilk as "Eskimos have x words for snow."
You're backpacking. You run out of water. The streams are dry. Generally, the cure is to turn around and hike back to the last place where there was water. Your chances of dying on the hike back are fairly small.
> In article <0051ec28$0$16926$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, > Ben Crowell <crowel...@lightSPAMandISmatterEVIL.com> wrote:
>> Clurrie wrote: >> > I'm kinda partial to the Scout >> > motto: "Be Prepared".
>> Next time I see a coyote, I'd love to be prepared with a camera. If >> not, then I'd like to be prepared with some knowledge of coyotes >> that would help me to be a good observer and understand what I'm >> seeing.
>> If you want to be prepared for a life-threatening attack by a >> large mammal, the best preparation is probably to learn defensive >> driving against people driving SUVs while yakking on their cell >> phones.
> You just need to go to where the coyotes live.... I have a small pack > that live in my Close Neighborhood (Close = 10 Sq Miles) and have for > the last 4 -5 years. I see them about once a month, and their tracks, > weekly... They aren't interested in "Me" or my other human Close > Neighbors, but they actually hide very well, when our local Wolf Pack > comes thru the area, on a 28 Day Winter Routine.... as do most of the > other non-human mammals, during the Wolves 2 day Stay, before moving on > down the peninsula.
- I spent a week at a camp in Baja California where the camp manager had arrived at an understanding with the coyotes. They wanted water from the camp, and nothing else. They would come into camp and steal/destroy the black solar water bladders that were for shower use. The camp manager got rid of the problem by carrying a bucket of water a quarter mile out of camp every morning. From that point on, it was very unusual to see/hear one.
> In article <slrnhf8gio.npi.lever...@askin-17.linkpendium.com>, > "Wolf Leverich" <lever...@linkpendium.com> wrote:
>> It's depressingly predictable, because people are not making >> rational choices with regard to what's gonna keep them alive.
>> Cheers, Wolf.
> I suspect that most of these folks just don't have the experience, and > therefor their judgments, and choices, are based on other things, rather > than experience, rational or not.....
> there is a BIG difference, between hiking in the rural American Flatlands > east of the Mississippi, and hiking in actual Wilderness Areas, that can > be found west of the Mississippi..... Not to mention doing ANY Foot > Traveling in the bush of Alaska.... and equipping for such travel in > each of these areas, requires different considerations....
You bet.
Different environments, different gear.
Also, different people need different gear sets to stay safe. Some folks have naturally higher metabolisms, and they need carbs to stay warm; other people just don't burn that much and gotta have layers.
> Wolf Leverich wrote: >> What you do know every time you go out in the Lower 48 is that >> you're something like 1,000 times more likely to die of >> hypothermia or dehydation than animal attack.
>> It is irrational and stupid to trade weight that could keep you >> alive for a boat anchor.
>> The reason why I harp on this is that I've led hundreds of >> backcountry group trips, and one of the most irritating problems >> is getting people to leave the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo (and >> their microwave) at home, and carry a few extra quarts of water.
>> In 50 years of backcountry travel I have never seen a use for >> the .45 and 2000 rounds of ammo, let alone the microwave. But I >> watch somebody get cold or run out of water on every frickin trip.
>> It's depressingly predictable, because people are not making >> rational choices with regard to what's gonna keep them alive.
> I agree 100% with the spirit of your post. OTOH, I want to be > grouchy and argumentative about dehydration. Dehydration can > kill you fairly quickly compared to, e.g., malnutrition. But > people vastly overestimate the need for hydration. The whole > thing about needing x liters of water per day is an urban > folktale of the same ilk as "Eskimos have x words for snow."
> You're backpacking. You run out of water. The streams are dry. > Generally, the cure is to turn around and hike back to the last > place where there was water. Your chances of dying on the hike > back are fairly small.
Yup, you're right.
No religion here about water; it's just that I'm in Southern California and do a lot of desert hiking, so hydration is a real problem in my particular environment.
I've got a couple of friends dead from dehydration, one up on Rattlesnake above Los Angeles and another on Martinez up above Palm Springs.
But yeah, in a lot of places hydration is a relative non-issue. It wouldn't make any sense at all to spend much weight on water if you're always within easy reach of surface water.
|
