are we still allowed to be survivalists?

[andyn]

I've just read this post from start to finish and have a couple of questions/statements.

Firstly...of course you can call yourself a survivalist....but what are you trying to survive from? You seem to state that you are surviving from life, whereas i see from your location that you live in the UK, and you have internet access so i can't imagine you live in that much hardship or that you have a struggle to live and can possible class yourslef as being in a survival situation 100% of the time, so surely you should really call yourself an "armchair surviavlist" or perhaps a "hobby survivalist" because you will ONLY become a "surviavlist" when you need to put those skills into practice in order to return yourself back to a state of comfort and normallity.

Secondly you say later on in you comments that Survival is for the military and Bushcraft is for Civilians....Sorry but that seems somewhat narrow minded to me. Anyone can find themselves in a survival situation, lost in a snow storm, fog, downed plane, out at sea on a damaged boat etc etc Im guessing that joe bloggs wouldnt decide to sit down and practice bushcraft skills or "mind the bluebells" as you put it just because he was a civilian.

 

[Spikey DaPikey]

Whatever makes you feel better

>>>>>SNIP<<<<<<

In closing, perhaps you should have a think about a common human reaction. A person is feeling fine, another person who they don't know very well comes over and starts asking them what the problem is, what they are angry about? Puzzled, the first person replies that they are not angy, and everything is fine. However, the second person persists, they won't accept that there is nothing wrong and that the person was content, and they suggest that the first person is in denial since it is quite obvious that there is some problem which is making the first person angry...by the time the exchange is over, the first person is indeed seething with supressed rage, and if confronted the second can say how sorry they are, but see, they were right, that person was angry even though they denied it at first!

This is not an effective way of introducing yourself, or of enquiring after someone's well being!

Very well said.

 

[crazydave]

I've just read this post from start to finish and have a couple of questions/statements.

Firstly...of course you can call yourself a survivalist....but what are you trying to survive from? You seem to state that you are surviving from life, whereas i see from your location that you live in the UK, and you have internet access so i can't imagine you live in that much hardship or that you have a struggle to live and can possible class yourslef as being in a survival situation 100% of the time, so surely you should really call yourself an "armchair surviavlist" or perhaps a "hobby survivalist" because you will ONLY become a "surviavlist" when you need to put those skills into practice in order to return yourself back to a state of comfort and normallity.

Secondly you say later on in you comments that Survival is for the military and Bushcraft is for Civilians....Sorry but that seems somewhat narrow minded to me. Anyone can find themselves in a survival situation, lost in a snow storm, fog, downed plane, out at sea on a damaged boat etc etc Im guessing that joe bloggs wouldnt decide to sit down and practice bushcraft skills or "mind the bluebells" as you put it just because he was a civilian.

without prejudice

Starting again - the discussion was started to find out if the term survivalist was acceptable for those who practise bushcraft/survival as the term has been given a bad perception as consequent replies have proven. I guess reading it all in one go rather than in the dribble it was written in has clouded some eyes a touch as I've been badged a survivalist in your definition not mine.

For me there is no difference except that to my eyes the overall depth of knowledge in bushcraft is a lot less. People think that we do a week course 10 years ago then sit at home for rest of the time waiting for the world to end or a 747 to land on the town. what you dont maybe get is that I practise my survival skills and add few now considered bushcraft when I bimble off into the woods and have done for the past 22 years. I'm not waiting for anything to happen - but what if it does?

the arguament was that survival is considered a military art which it isn't and that bushcraft is a civvy one which again it isn't. (I come from survival so did rm and even leon admits it) I was trying to find out why this was the case as the survival fraternity dont understand it either. jesus was after all a jew not a christian. (no doubt that will start someone off as well)

I raised the point that rm was rejected by the mil as bit of interesting trivia I can see why he applied as like me he had an influential teacher. I was asked why I brought this up as it had no relevance. Thinking on I think it does as a cerebral task - if rm had been accepted by the marines and died in bosnia or never been on the telly - would bushcraft as its understood now or even this site even exist?

now as the current champion of 'bushcraft' rm was in a heli crash a few years ago. in short he dragged the pilot and film crew out and stabilised the wounded, generally doing what was needed despite being covered in avgas and a potential human torch. it was an accident but it happened and his survival skills got him out. not under current definitions his bushcraft ones. survival skills are many and varied.

Now survivalism has a bad name which was why I asked the question in the first place - its been a few years since I approached the subject in any depth due to moving to the other end of the country and I'll be honest that I am surprised at the hostility towards the subject. for example 10 years ago I would wander off into dalby/langdale forest with my mates and we would buy some trout from the local fish farm or a rabbit/chicken or two and forage for the rest or rat pack it, build a shelter or if it was summer sling our hammocks under our basha's and enjoy the weekend practising skills we learnt years before. most of us were scout leaders so the knowledge was generally passed on down the generation. no killing unless it was for eating, no plane crashes, plague or russian invasion just living in the woods. we even had permission as some of us were rangers and also female not the dpm wearing thugs we are meant to be.

Now 10 years later it appears I have to call it bushcraft to be politically correct and I guess I'm curious to know why. This site is called bushcraft but the skills are survival in origin. A car is still called a car but a ford focus is nothing like a model t.

It was meant as an active discussion not a slanging match and I am sorry that it didn't go the way it was intended. Bushcraft did exist before 2003 it was called survival is all. Now I've said that then no doubt the blinkers will drop down again and the I'm not a survivalist replies will start - its the same on the other side and even the ludlow guys are not true survivalists in the perceived new definition as they are interested in self sufficiency and worried about hiccups in society not its destruction. I'd be more inclined to call them goodlifers or going greeners if thats not offensive as they are interested in wind/solar power and sourcing their own clean water.

I didn't create the rift as has been implied. I have however spotted it is there and am curious as to why there is such hostility between the two camps ( as mentioned earlier I read a lot of different views to get a rounder picture - most sites forums have had this discussion without my input and none so far can give a reasonable explanation) - when world of survival was on the telly the take up on survival courses went up considerably then it changed to bushcraft with a different picture book to buy and things shifted to the left - maybe thats all it is but whats in a name? quite a lot going by this thread so far. If it aint broke dont fix it - well it has to work properly to start with.

Incidentally - I have done an in depth reply to a request for advice of jungle training in another section so feel free to pick it apart - to me its survival advice as the jungle is a nasty sweaty place full of beauty and beasts alike, it could also be called bushcraft advice, hiking hints or even common sense. At the end of the day its shared knowledge which is the point of the whole discussion as there shouldn't be a difference or a rift for that matter just a pool of knowledge which needs to be shared.

oh eck just seen the length - sorry.

Ps anyone have rm's email address so I can chat to him about it.

 

[jasons]

z z z z z z z z z zz z z z z z z z zz z z z z z :Wow: z z z z z z z z

 

[Bigman]

The original question and the title of this post was;

Are we still allowed to be survivalists?

Well after a bit of searching and sifting through various amounts of data I found this;

A survivalist?

A person who makes preparations to survive a widespread catastrophe, as an atomic war or anarchy, esp. by storing food and weapons in a safe place.

Or you could have;

One who has personal or group survival as a primary goal in the face of difficulty, opposition, and especially the threat of natural catastrophe, nuclear war, or societal collapse.

Or there's this one;

Someone who tries to insure their personal survival or the survival of their group or nation.

These are all definitions from various types of dictionaries.

The next question was;

Bushcraft v Survival - One and the same or different?

Given the defininitions I would say that they aren't the same plus I wouldn't say that was I practising survivalism, instead I would say, I'm practising bushcraft.

 

[andyn]

without prejudice

Starting again - the discussion was started to find out if the term survivalist was acceptable for those who practise bushcraft/survival as the term has been given a bad perception as consequent replies have proven. I guess reading it all in one go rather than in the dribble it was written in has clouded some eyes a touch as I've been badged a survivalist in your definition not mine.

For me there is no difference except that to my eyes the overall depth of knowledge in bushcraft is a lot less. People think that we do a week course 10 years ago then sit at home for rest of the time waiting for the world to end or a 747 to land on the town. what you dont maybe get is that I practise my survival skills and add few now considered bushcraft when I bimble off into the woods and have done for the past 22 years. I'm not waiting for anything to happen - but what if it does?

the arguament was that survival is considered a military art which it isn't and that bushcraft is a civvy one which again it isn't. (I come from survival so did rm and even leon admits it) I was trying to find out why this was the case as the survival fraternity dont understand it either. jesus was after all a jew not a christian. (no doubt that will start someone off as well)

I raised the point that rm was rejected by the mil as bit of interesting trivia I can see why he applied as like me he had an influential teacher. I was asked why I brought this up as it had no relevance. Thinking on I think it does as a cerebral task - if rm had been accepted by the marines and died in bosnia or never been on the telly - would bushcraft as its understood now or even this site even exist?

now as the current champion of 'bushcraft' rm was in a heli crash a few years ago. in short he dragged the pilot and film crew out and stabilised the wounded, generally doing what was needed despite being covered in avgas and a potential human torch. it was an accident but it happened and his survival skills got him out. not under current definitions his bushcraft ones. survival skills are many and varied.

Now survivalism has a bad name which was why I asked the question in the first place - its been a few years since I approached the subject in any depth due to moving to the other end of the country and I'll be honest that I am surprised at the hostility towards the subject. for example 10 years ago I would wander off into dalby/langdale forest with my mates and we would buy some trout from the local fish farm or a rabbit/chicken or two and forage for the rest or rat pack it, build a shelter or if it was summer sling our hammocks under our basha's and enjoy the weekend practising skills we learnt years before. most of us were scout leaders so the knowledge was generally passed on down the generation. no killing unless it was for eating, no plane crashes, plague or russian invasion just living in the woods. we even had permission as some of us were rangers and also female not the dpm wearing thugs we are meant to be.

Now 10 years later it appears I have to call it bushcraft to be politically correct and I guess I'm curious to know why. This site is called bushcraft but the skills are survival in origin. A car is still called a car but a ford focus is nothing like a model t.

It was meant as an active discussion not a slanging match and I am sorry that it didn't go the way it was intended. Bushcraft did exist before 2003 it was called survival is all. Now I've said that then no doubt the blinkers will drop down again and the I'm not a survivalist replies will start - its the same on the other side and even the ludlow guys are not true survivalists in the perceived new definition as they are interested in self sufficiency and worried about hiccups in society not its destruction. I'd be more inclined to call them goodlifers or going greeners if thats not offensive as they are interested in wind/solar power and sourcing their own clean water.

I didn't create the rift as has been implied. I have however spotted it is there and am curious as to why there is such hostility between the two camps ( as mentioned earlier I read a lot of different views to get a rounder picture - most sites forums have had this discussion without my input and none so far can give a reasonable explanation) - when world of survival was on the telly the take up on survival courses went up considerably then it changed to bushcraft with a different picture book to buy and things shifted to the left - maybe thats all it is but whats in a name? quite a lot going by this thread so far. If it aint broke dont fix it - well it has to work properly to start with.

Incidentally - I have done an in depth reply to a request for advice of jungle training in another section so feel free to pick it apart - to me its survival advice as the jungle is a nasty sweaty place full of beauty and beasts alike, it could also be called bushcraft advice, hiking hints or even common sense. At the end of the day its shared knowledge which is the point of the whole discussion as there shouldn't be a difference or a rift for that matter just a pool of knowledge which needs to be shared.

oh eck just seen the length - sorry.

Ps anyone have rm's email address so I can chat to him about it.

I think really you have answered your own question, and yet you still insist you practice survival.

Survival is hardly walking into town buying some food and chipping off to the woods for a jolly to go and replay something you were taught is it?

Survival is as you said it what RM and others have had to do when they were forced into a situation that had potential life threatening outcome.

So in answer to your question, anyone can call them a survivalist if they are in the right situation. Otherwise no they cant really, can they?

But at the end of the day you can call yourself whatever you want.

 

[falling rain]

Crazydave you're coming across as though you're deliberately trying to start an argument, and rub people up the wrong way. There's nothing to discuss (at least certainly not to the extent you seem to want to thrash this out.) Call it what you want and put yourself in whatever box you want does it really matter?. Do survivalists practice 'Tracking animals' - not the same. You wrote - ''For me there is no difference except that to my eyes the overall depth of knowledge in bushcraft is a lot less.'' - So why are you arguing the toss if there is no difference? - and I'd disagree with the statement anyway. People are at different levels of knowledge whether you call yourself a survivalist or bushcrafter we all have to start somewhere. You seem to have a lot of time to spend on forums and even admitted to enjoying arguing with the Americans. Do you actually practice any of your survival skills or just enjoy debating about them?

 

[Spikey DaPikey]

PLEASE Do Not Feed The Trolls !!!


:twak:

 

[pibbleb]

I have to say I agree with everything that Falling Rain has said here!

You claim you want to know why survivalists have a bad name, but I'd ask do they, well probably yes if you are trotting around your local woods all cam'd up hand stitching your own open cuts whilst wearing I'm a survivalist t-shirt. Why well you yourself have referred to incidents that have happended in this country that have had an effect on our Countries gun laws and the general publics opinion of those who enjoy wilderness camping. However, if you don't run around with a big sign above your head saying 'Survivalist Here' then I suspect they probably don't have a bad reputation as people probably don't care what you are doing as long as you don't bother them.

is Bushcraft a survivalists good P.R. well in the beginning I suspect so however, as with all things it has grown and now in its adolescents it is the perfect description for many core hobbies, lifestyle choices and careers, but to be honest if you speak the general public about bushcraft they will still be a little suspicious of what you are up to in the woods. My mates who aren't into bushcraft still think everything I do when I'm out ends in a barrel roll .

So is it ok to call yourself a survivalist, well to be honest you can call yourself Willy Wonka if you like, after all whats in a name!

You've mentioned in your last post people picking holes in what you've said. I would suggest it's as much what as it is how.

You mention RM's failed military career and I seem to recall somewhere you mention his weight. My God man did Ray bounce a cheque of yours once! This man provides training and advice to the military, a far more valuable service I would say and as for his weight, this isn't Heat Magazine who cares. I'm seriously fatas those who've met me will testify to but I can still complete the BFT easily does that make me bad at what I do?

You mention Christ being a Jew, well yes he was well done! but again what relevance has this got with the subject. You even mention that this comment will fire someone off so, why risk upsetting someone.

Finally, I have to say that in my experience those who feel they have to brag about what they've done and who've they met often are rather limited in genuine experience.

Can I ask that you stop taking advantage of the our open forum. Your comments are clearly designed to upset, and I would say that some of your comments have been rather close to the racist mark and it would seem that you are now prepared to start on religion. Racist and comments likely to create religious hatred are illegal in this Country, have these comments been that, well it just takes one person to be offended for it to be so! Just a friendly warning.

Sorry Mods and Tony, I hope I haven't stepped to far over the mark but this guy is trolling IMHO and I'd hate for us to have to return to the days of old because of one individual.

Pib

 

[spamel]

now as the current champion of 'bushcraft' rm was in a heli crash a few years ago. in short he dragged the pilot and film crew out and stabilised the wounded, generally doing what was needed despite being covered in avgas and a potential human torch. it was an accident but it happened and his survival skills got him out. not under current definitions his bushcraft ones. survival skills are many and varied.

What you describe here is survival, but I think the situation dictates that! It would have been a bit foolhardy for Ray to start whittling a spoon in the crashed helicopter!

I don't think he did anything that a person practising bushcraft couldn't do. First aid should be learnt by all, even to a basic level. I am lucky that I have learnt a bit of first aid through my time in the forces, but the basic principles could be learnt for use in this sort of situation by scouring the internet. Just make sure you only use that info in an emergency or you may end up in court!

After that, the human instinct to survive would have come to the fore, and this doesn't necessarily require formal training. Did any of the people who crashed in the Andes have any formal survival training? No, and I'd wager that there isn't a survival course on earth that tells you to tuck in to the pilot if you run out of food, but these people realised what they had to do to survive.

Survival skills are an important skill for somebody in the forces deinitely, and unfortunately it only gets touched on at the more specialist units such as Special Forces, Royal Marines and maybe the Infantry. Normal units do nothing, which I find incredible considering the aircraft that get taken out now and then by insurgents and terrorists, etc. Who knows where you may come down, or even if mechanical failure will take you down?

I'm not saying it shouldn't be practised by civilians mind you, why not? I think that you have to temper what you learn with the reality of being thrust into that situation. If you never fly anywhere, and only trek into places like the lake district, what would be the point in having to learn subsistence living, you're never going to be too far from rescue so a few days at most would be all you need. On the other hand, if you sail a lot, maybe a good sea survival course and learning to live like Steve Callaghan or Maurice and Maralyn Bailey did would be beneficial.

As for the tagging and naming of the two subjects, I think what you need to do is ask yourself which one do I want to be? I don't want to be a survivalist, because when I go out and practise my skills, I don't see myself surviving more as I am living. Therefore, I am bushcrafting, living in the bush in comfort and practising skills that will improve my comfort level.

If you want to be a survivor, shouldn't you walk into the woods with a pen knife, some wire, a fishing kit and a heliograph and eke out an existence until a passing people carrier can rescue you?

 

[Seagull]

This thread is wandering all over, innit.

How can anyone benefit?

Meanwhile.

I have a paper bag, that ,once, had pies in.


Ceeg

 

[Womble]

I could quote some William Rees MacGonnagal, if it would be any help.

Folks - this is getting possibly just a bit too heated for its own good. I must admit I cannot quite see Crazydaves point - skills are skills no matter how they're catagorised - but is it really so imflammetory as to generate this level of heat?

 

[jdlenton]

I have a paper bag, that ,once, had pies in.

coor i want one can you get them of evil bay ? ooh just had a though what sort of pies and were they hot?

 

[sandsnakes]

Reading all the arguments everybody seems to be saying the same thing.

The only differance I can percive is that in the UK 'survivalists', by public perception, are more associated with the Rambo films. Bushcrafters are more associated with RM.

Rambo is associated with blowing up small towns and sewing up wounds. RM on the other hand is associated with cooking very 'dodgy grubs and critters' in the undergrowth and saying 'hmmm lovley, tastes like chicken!'. I can only observe that RM must have eated some very iffy chicken vindaloo and half hundred rotted birds to think that it all 'lovely!'.

The argument is cultural more than skills based, most UK people think of mad people with guns, strange semi-regious comunities in the US waiting for the end of the world when the word 'survivalist' is raised.

Many people wish to distance their interests and hobbies from the extremist views, including UK survivalists who do not want the 'mad people in the woods' tag, those who wish to further disassociate from the 'extreme survivalists' opt for bushcraft hat. Bushcraft is probably a little more conservative, yet does the same things as 'survival'.

I would say UK survival and survivalists differ from those in the USA as do those in Europe. As I pointed out, its more cultural than skills based.

Thats it really... same stuff differant package.

'Tescos or Sainsbury cornflakes sir?'
'Er, what's the differance?'
'The box sir.'

 

[gregorach]

Indeed. These "survival vs bushcraft" threads always seem to degenerate. I guess it may be because you're (that's "you" in the general sense, not any specific person) asking (some) people to re-evaluate how they identify themselves - in a sense, it's challenging (some) people's conceptions of (part of) their own identities. Always a good way to start a fight.

The funny thing about it is that I'd be willing to bet money that if you got even the most polarised opponents on this issue round a campfire, they'd get on fine.

To paraphrase a Buddhist proverb, we're arguing about the finger when we're supposed to be looking at the moon.

 

[The Joker]

I reckon survivalists wear NBC outfits and big bowie knives and don't smile much, and Bushcrafters.........Swanni's, big grins and silly hats

The skills are similar if not the same, but survival is beating all odds..........and Bushcraft is a choice within your life............Just a thought

I have to say when I first started out in the late 80's early 90's it was survival, which to me meant, to be camo'd up crawling around trying not to be seen and feeling a right prat if the public spotted you, with a led lined cellar full of baked beans and recycled pee.

And Bushcraft was wearing half decent outdoor clothing, walking and observing nature and a hell of lot more laid back.

 

[jdlenton]

To paraphrase a Buddhist proverb, we're arguing about the finger when we're supposed to be looking at the moon.

finger, moon pies beer

 

[Lurch]

And Bushcraft was .....
.....a hell of lot more laid back.

Slightly ironic given the amount of hackles up in this thread.

Takes two to have an argument folks, if you think crazydave is trolling then don't respond.

 

[Eric_Methven]

To me, survivalists like to start pointless arguments while bushcrafters simply tolerate their silly behaviour like one would tolerate a puppy trying to hump their leg. Amusing to some extent, a bit embarasing after a while then shake it off and get on with something more important.

Eric

 

[Lithril]

Takes two to have an argument folks, if you think crazydave is trolling then don't respond.

No it doesn't. I'm telling you it does. Don't you shout at me. Who is shouting? Look if I've told you once....


Sorry couldn't resist.