Much, if not most, of the survival info we get from tv, mags and books is sheer nons

[wvbreamfisherman]

You can hardly go wrong if you keep OODA in mind.

Observe (learn about whats going on or what you plan to do)

Orient (look around at the alternative paths)

Decide (pretty obvious- decide which path to follow)

Act (get moving on the path you decide upon)

Usually this is talked about in the context of quick thinking and decision-making (as in a fighter pilot thinking, if I can stay inside this other guy's OODA loop I'll nail him), but it doesn't have to be.
In the context of survival information:

Learn about different techniques and ideas

Think about them and what ones seem practical and useful to you

Pick out the ones you want to try.

Give them a run thru (even if its just trying it in your backyard- would you take a brand new stove backpacking without trying it out first?).

Now you're back at the beginning of the loop again- did it do what you wanted? Can it be

improved? Did it turn out to be crappy idea?

I've read and seen all sorts of nonsense about survival and the outdoors. Sometimes there is a nugget of useful information at the bottom of a pile of BS. Experience helps winnow that out.

Just my $0.02

 

[Davefromva]

I agree with your points but I do think we can learn a lot from survival programmes, I know I have. Bear Grylls is good, as is Ray Mears, and I've been enjoying the 'Man,Woman,Wild' series, lots of helpful tips on offer.

Respectfully disagree. I feel that Bear may be knowledgeable on certain things but when he suggests idiotic things to do to survive in his shows, that's when I change the channel. Like jumping off a rock face into a waterfall rather than going around the safe rout to the bottom. He is trying to get ratings rather than provide real valuable info. His show is a joke. I like Les Stroud because he shows his human side. He makes mistakes just like the rest of us and admits it by not editing it out of the footage. He has no immediate support and is having to actually carry his gear. Not to mention he walks the walk, he lives off grid permanently.

 

[oldsarge]

Respectfully disagree. I feel that Bear may be knowledgeable on certain things but when he suggests idiotic things to do to survive in his shows, that's when I change the channel. Like jumping off a rock face into a waterfall rather than going around the safe rout to the bottom. He is trying to get ratings rather than provide real valuable info. His show is a joke.

How true. His show is like "Looky what I can do", A perfect example of what not to do.

 

[Greatoutdoors]

I agree with what several people here have said about going out and using what you "think" you have learned. I love watching the survival shows and I have learned a lot from them. However, if you can't go out into the woods and do those things yourself did you really "learn" anything?

 

[Esperahol]

Like jumping off a rock face into a waterfall rather than going around the safe rout to the bottom.

I remember that and my immediate thought of - "Idiot". If you jump off you have an excellent chance of breaking something, knocking yourself out, and/or drowning. Which means there are now folks who really think this is how you handle a fall and who are going to see themselves into a world of hurt if someone doesn't take them in hand.

 

[ppine]

Watching other people on TV and reading a lot is not a waste of time in my opinion. You can get a lot of ideas that way and save from having to reinvent the wheel. The field experience has to go along with it. People that do things the same way all their lives miss out.

I have run into several people recently that are blue-collar types (did not have the benefit of college education). I carried tools for 5 years as a commercial electrician back in the 1980s myself. Lately they have been trying to tell me that college-trained guys don't know what they are talking about. This is an old arguement, but a tiresome one. If your interested in a topic, reading about it and watching others on TV will help the breadth of your understanding whether it is survival training or anything else.

 

[wvbreamfisherman]

First off, Bear Grylls is a show-boating exhibitionist. He's always got a bunch of back up people at hand, a lot of his stuff is staged for effect, and he does risky, stupid stuff (e.g. here's this frigid, long Scottish lake- why don't i use a rotten skeepskin for a float and cross it?).

Second- I was lucky enough to be able to work hands on in a chemical plant while I studied Chemical Engineering. I learned a helluva lot that you'd never ever get in 50 years of college. Conversely, I learned a lot of stuff iin college that I'd never ever get in a career working hands on out in the plant.

You can learn important stuff from college AND any job, or anyone (even a total fool- you learn what NOT to do). A well-rounded person learns his job or craft from as many sources and perspectives as possible.

 

[Davefromva]

I am currently a college student working on a BS in Mechatronics and I plan to go for my masters afterwards. I am also a candidate for the Apprentice School at the Shipyard. A blue collar job. Hoping I get it. But back to topic. I dont really think that whether or not someone is a blue collar worker or a college professor has anything to do with having common sense in the wild. You either take to the time to learn and practice it or you dont.
I am a firm believer that "man" in general should take the time to learn the basic fundamentals of hard labor and primitive living in addition to propelling oneself forward in the academic world.

 

[ChadTower]

Watching other people on TV and reading a lot is not a waste of time in my opinion.

I didn't see anyone say it's a waste of time. It's useful and has its place in the learning process. It is not, however, the entire process nor even a substantial part of the process.

Let's use a metal match as an example. You can see Dave Canterbury use one on Dual Survival. You can go order one off his website. The show taught you what a metal match is and where you can get one. That is good. The show did not teach you how to use the thing. A person learns that by taking it outside, building themselves a tinder bundle, and getting a fire going with it. In that process they have learned to use the tool but also how to gather and assemble a tinder bundle, how to nurse a smoking bundle into a flame, how to gather firewood properly, how to prepare the wood to accept a flaming tinder bundle, and then how to keep it burning long enough to create coals.

Those are all distinct individual skills in the process of building a fire. I truly believe nobody has actually learned them until they have done it for themself.

 

[oldsarge]

I truly believe nobody has actually learned them until they have done it for themself.

Exactly! It's all about practical application. All the knowledge in the world does you no good unless you can put it to use.

 

[ghostdog]

Watching other people on TV and reading a lot is not a waste of time in my opinion. You can get a lot of ideas that way and save from having to reinvent the wheel. The field experience has to go along with it. People that do things the same way all their lives miss out.

That is how I see it too. Some things are good for musing over and some may become valuable. Try out what you find interesting and take what you can use. Leave the rest.

I call my side yard Advanced Base Camp as it is a staging area for techniques and experiments. I can perfect outdoor methods before I set out into the wild. Other experiments can be done in the wild before you try to rely on them.

One peeve I have always had is the Solar Still. We constructed two of them one sunny day in very wet earth and sand and left them to collect for five hours. The holes were four feet wide and four feet deep. It took a lot of effort to build them and we only got a cup and a half of water out of them. It was not enough to bother with loosing all the sweat it took to build them together. I have heard the same story over and over with those who have actually tried them yet you see them in many survival manuals.

 

[Greatoutdoors]

Well the solar still is for SURVIVAL. I have never seen anyone say that they were going to produce a gallon of water. Now you have the experience of knowing you can do it if you have to, but you also know not to depend on that option solely. I personally would still see it in the plus column.

 

[ghostdog]

Well the solar still is for SURVIVAL. I have never seen anyone say that they were going to produce a gallon of water. Now you have the experience of knowing you can do it if you have to, but you also know not to depend on that option solely. I personally would still see it in the plus column.

What were the results when you made one? What was your overall experience?

 

[Theo]

What were the results when you made one? What was your overall experience?

Well, you had better results than I did. And I even added greens to the still for more moisture. Personally, I don't think they are worth the energy to make. Not enough return for the effort. Kind of like using a corn chip to light a fire. It can be done but it would do you more good as food than tinder.

 

[ghostdog]

Well, you had better results than I did. And I even added greens to the still for more moisture. Personally, I don't think they are worth the energy to make. Not enough return for the effort. Kind of like using a corn chip to light a fire. It can be done but it would do you more good as food than tinder.

I totally agree. I was lucky enough to have very damp soil when we made our stills, unlike one usually finds in the desert.

I know people all talk about how much water you loose when constructing a solar still but I didn’t seem to have that problem. Of course it may have been different if I had not thought to bring a twangy headed Scottish girlfriend with her favorite shovel. I could not imagine doing this by hand or with a digging stick.

Some time after that I came across a book that I like among that genre of books, David Alloway’s Desert Survival Skills. His area of operation was Big Bend and the Chihuahuan Desert. He takes as dim a view on solar stills as you and I do. He calls them a cult item in survival lore. He used to make all of his students build one just to show the high failure rate in normal conditions, a side that the books don’t deal with sufficiently. The normal yield was one cup over a full day. Some didn’t give any water at all.

He did have a very interesting piece of information on estimated survival time and labor. Physiology of Man in the Desert by E. F. Adolph illustrates temperature, physical exertion and dehydration. A person at complete rest in 100 degree temperatures in the shade has an expected survival of 9.5 days with 10 quarts of water. A person with the same water and in the same temperatures who walks at night until exhausted and rests in the shade in the day cuts their survival time to 5.5 days.

You really don’t want to loose any water to labor if you have a choice.

And how many times have we seen anyone on those survival TV shows making a solar still. I have one time. I think it was Ray Mears in Arizona. He didn’t get a drop out of his. It was a total disaster. I have not seen anyone try it since. Has anyone else seen this done on one of the survival TV shows? I have only seen a few episodes of this kind of thing so I very well could have missed it but even with shows where they can’t find a water source, I have not seen anyone after Ray do this.

So this thread is about real world experience over just taking what the books and TV shows tell us? Some things are learned by experience that you just don't get from a book… :rofl:

10 Gauge Double Barrel Shotgun (TWO bullets in) vs Me .. 110lbs - YouTube

 

[wvbreamfisherman]

Ya gotta lean into the weapon when you're that little. At least she had it tight to her shoulder. Ouch!

 

[ghostdog]

Ya gotta lean into the weapon when you're that little. At least she had it tight to her shoulder. Ouch!

At least she was laughing about it. Though I haven't shot a 10 guage, I always found a magnum 12 gauge pushed, not the kick of a high powered rifle. Anyway the take from that part of the whole thing is; if you weight a dollar ten perhaps a .410 bore is a better choice than a double 10 gauge now that she actually tried it for herself. :tinysmile_twink_t2:

 

[Grandpa]

It's all about fit. If I hand my extended stock shotgun to my petite little wife, she's gonna get rocked. But cut that stock down to fit her and raise the comb to match her cheek placement and she can shoot all day.

You see it all the time at the trap shoots when those little sub-juniors are shooting 100 target events with a 12 guage.

 

[Tubby]

Ouch! I remember doing something like that when I was a child. It was a good lesson and I will remember it all of my life. I DID learn to shoot when I was a kid though, and now I do fair with a shotgun. As far as survival skills, I have to agree with the majority who say you really need to try things out before you need it. The experience of trying and failing or succeeding is the best way to remember any technique.

 

[ghostdog]

It's all about fit. If I hand my extended stock shotgun to my petite little wife, she's gonna get rocked. But cut that stock down to fit her and raise the comb to match her cheek placement and she can shoot all day.

You see it all the time at the trap shoots when those little sub-juniors are shooting 100 target events with a 12 guage.

Good point. I wonder if she was shooting target loads or the full magnum. That gun was bigger than she was.

Now, I wounder if we could get her to build a solar still and post the video.