Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
in reply to: Emergency Gear #25536
Gents, I frankly chose the wrong thread to post my frustrations about contemporary outdoors folk seeming more interested in gear than the more substantive aspects of hunting and other traditional-values outdoor activities. To see “gear-headedness” grow in popularity on tradbow.com, of all places, disappoints and bores me. But that’s my problem … I can simply go read a good book or take a walk in the woods rather than stare at the computer. And more and more that’s what I’m doing. The topic of survival gear, like the topic of what we need to carry in order to be able to deal respectfully with the meat we produce (I am constantly amazed and angered at the number of hunters who are woefully unprepared, both with gear and skills, to deal with the produce of a “hunt of a lifetime” when they’re otherwise richly equipped) … these are the most appropriate areas for thoughtful gear selection. Still, overall, I believe that over-attention to things we buy rather than the things we do and think, is among the many ways modern culture and marketing distract us (very profitably for the distractors) from the more substantive aspects of hunting, outdoor adventure, and life, trivializing it all. But this is the wrong thread to have dumped that line of thought into. Sorry to have inappropriately detoured you. I stand beside what I said, but I said it in the wrong place.
in reply to: mushrooms and elk..i think.. #11250My experience and study with wild shrooms are largely limited to morels. I have read that they have no nutritional value in a couple of respected guide books. Perhaps I err, as so often, in generalizing. Turning your question around, I’d appreciate being pointed toward reliable edification re just what nutritional value, that is calories that will keep a body alive, which shrooms contain. In fact I lost a bit of my strong appetite for fungi after reading they are just bulk and filler. I’d like to get it back.
in reply to: mushrooms and elk..i think.. #10918I’ve not seen elk or bear eat shrooms, but I’m not out there 24×7 watching. I have seen mule deer eat them, but usually just a single bite, as if testing to see which ones might make them invisible. I worry about squirrels that spend so much time hauling shrooms to their nest each fall, since fungi are said to have zero nutritional values, calories, etc. Maybe they make good bedding. In the old days, I found some that actually made me larger, best I can remember. 😛
in reply to: spruce shafts #10251My experience–as a compulsive “try every possible arrow wood” experimenter–echoes Steve’s. And I must add that SS, like every other softwood I’ve tried, just can’t stand up to a heavy broadhead and a heavy bone impact, aka elk, even with a 3″ external sleeve for reinforcement (it just moves the break point back). But for whitetails and turkeys, should be no problem. But then, for whitetails and turkeys, assuming you cling tenaciously to the light broadhead (125) and softwood “that’s enough with a well-places shot” tradition, I see no advantage of any softwood over good old cedar … except for the growing challenge of finding consistent-quality cedar shafts. But then, I see no advantage of any softwood over most hardwoods or carbons. As always, all discussion of “best arrows and broadheads” comes down to whether our loyalty goes to traditional and what we’re used to, or “taking no chances” on a wounding loss due to inadequate gear set-up. (OKN, WYKWTTRT.)
in reply to: Two Tracks String Scallops #10246Scallops are ridiculously overpriced, considering they are (I have heard on good authority) made from scraps from clothing items made by the same company. But that’s the only negative I can come up with, having used them for several years (and FYI I’ve used nothing but SBD strings for those same several years) and never had to replace the first pair. They may or may not work as well as larger and more complex silencers so far as silencing … but they work well enough for elk and Coues deer and turkey, and they don’t care about getting soaked with rain. They are also small and tight enough that you really have to work at it to get them to attract stickers, and it’s clear by now that the set I have will long outlast me. But they still cost too much IMO. It’s the world we live in.
Scott — I should probly say this in a PM, so as not to raise the hackles of the predictable hackle-raisers. But geeze, what a bonus to have wolves in your hunting area! I’ve spent a fair amount of time–not claiming any expertise but simply that I’ve been there and done that, several times in several places–among wolves, and never once have seen or experienced anything to suggest they are a threat to humans. I mean. they are a TE species and we are 7.3 billion!
As hunters–particularly as we are portrayed and portray ourselves in the outdoor media–we see ourselves as fearless macho adventurers … yet too many of us grasp every chance to display our wholly unjustified fear of wild nature. Weather, other humans, accidents and “us” are the real threats out there. I say, thank your lucky stars that you’ve heard wild wolves and have an op to hunt again where you may hear them again. Those who think otherwise should stay within the safety of their cornfield tree stands and quit attempting to parley their personal paranoias into “reality.” That’s the mentality of NRA and …
“I haven’t said enough; I’ve already said too much.”
in reply to: Emergency Gear #58842So, we are free to speak of applies and oranges without comparing them; fair enough. Well then, over on the pragmatic side, I now realize “gear head” is a shortcut and misleading ballpark term. More precisely, it strikes me that in hunting, as with most of life today, we often and understandably come to confuse “collecting stuff we must fabricate justifications for having,” with what is truly “needed.” The old “wants become needs” conundrum. I guess at some point this disappoints me, though my typing fingers are too tired to tap it all out and no one really cares anyhow. Bottom line is that for me it’s not an argument, but merely an investigation. “I haven’t said enough; I’ve already said too much.” I’m most happy to continue the conversation in person if you’ll be at Spokane this weekend … and esp. if you’re buying the booze. 😆
in reply to: Emergency Gear #58717Bruce — I didn’t mean to criticize anyone or anything, per se. My mind works differently than most, I guess, perhaps too often thinking sideways … that is, I have a passion for thinking about why we think what we think. So my comment above, and others on other threads previous and likely in future, was merely meant to reflect a musing on why even the most devoted and traditional hunters today spend far more time, not to mention money–at least from what I can gather from the media, including this site–focused on gear rather than the experience itself. Taking it a step further back, I’ve always been curious about the connection between contemporary human dedication to technology aka gear, and pre-Pleistocene folks obsessed with learning to chip a better stone point. Where did and does the positive side of the human obsession with technology/gear go from good to bad, or has it? So, ever how sloppily, I was attempting to ask an honest question and hoping others perhaps have the same questions, while in no way intentionally criticizing the thread or you or anyone else here … which I had thought I’d clarified via my provisos about the general sensibility of being a good Boy Scout. I was hoping to learn, not to put down others.
Perhaps I should be on a philosophy website rather than a tradbow website … but I am you and us, not them. That is, I’m most interested in people who think a lot like me yet differently. So far as what I carry …
TMS — Good point! You bring up not only “an interesting point” but what I believe is a common psychological reaction among humans, hunters and others, who find them/ourselves facing spooky dusk and knowing we’ll likely be out there all night: a strong preference to get the hell back “home” rather than using our survival gear and skills to stay out safely overnight. My belief has always been that this preference is not so much a concern for our own safety as it is concern for our loved ones. In those instances when I was in that fix, my only real concern, ALWAYS, was that my wife would worry about me, as opposed to a fear of spending a bivouac night in the woods alone. Among the odd “freedoms” I have “gained” by now being a widower is that I have no one at home or elsewhere to give a tinker’s dam about me. Being old enough that I feel I’ve already beat the game, even should I drop dead this moment, is also an “advantage.” Thus, my only real concern with getting stuck out no longer exists. Which is not to say that I feel reckless, but only that the game has changed notably. So for me at least you hit the “survival” nail on its slippery head.
Back to Bruce — My lifelong bottom-line philosophic concern–which drives all my weird questions and comments here and elsewhere is the question: How do we deal with death, both our own and that of all other living beings, without letting it lead us into self-delusion, which is the standard easy way out? This question, and my attempts to use my own experiences and feelings about killing animals as a reference point for my thinking about the death of my wife and my own pending, is a primary theme in “the film” as well, though I have no idea how effectively it comes across.
And danged if I know what any of that means to anyone else, as I’m not real sure myself. Yet that’s what happens when you ask old Elkfart a seemingly straightforward question.
Please ignore me and carry on …
in reply to: Emergency Gear #54450While it’s hardly a sin–in fact it’s arguably a major part of our evolutionary history–we seem to feel that if we have the right hardwear, we can defy death and live forever … rather than understanding that if we have the right outlook, maybe we can at least live today. I’m not real sure what that means in the “big picture,” but it’s my story and I’m sticking with it. In other words, where is the appropriate line between commonsense preparedness, and “gear-headedness”? And nothing really wrong with the latter either, so long as we realize that so often “need” is just a cover for “want.” 😛
in reply to: Killing Elk… #53272Over on the philosophical side–and whether or not it “works” to produce more animals for us to hunt–it comes down to whether we want wild animals out there or farmed. And whether, thus, we want to be hunters or harvesters.
in reply to: Spokane in March #47725Shane, sorry for the delayed response: I’ve been traveling–a bucket trip for my last family member, Clara the dog, also dying on filthy cancer. She loves chasing gulls on the CA beaches. Anyhow, the film won’t be available commercially for some time yet as the filmmaker’s intent from the start was to try and make a “hunting” film that could break into the mainstream via film festivals, and all the good festivals require no prior commercial release. Even the donors, to date, have gotten only a two-week link to see the current, mostly finished, version (they will get a DVD when that time comes). For now, the film will show at the BHA rendezvous in Spokane next month, and again in Jackson Hole at the end of May. Thanks for your interest … and thanks again to all for your great patience with the ridiculous amount of time this has taken and continues to take. I hope it’s worth the wait for all of us.
in reply to: Planning an Elk Hunt #47689Patrick, should you decide on the West Slope of CO, let me know and I’ll help as I can–anything to keep you here more than you’ve been in the past. :lol:: Meanwhile, I offered basic advice on researching a diy elk hunt in some book somewhere, maybe Man Made of Elk. I’m currently in CA visiting my wife’s family and getting a nostalgic dose of Pacific beach time, but it doesn’t sound like you’re in a rush.
in reply to: Lining the special interest in Colorado…..again #39313This bill was not put forth by CPW, who in fact were not even consulted. It was put forward by sheep ranching interests in the state legislature, who try every few years and so far fail. Their concern is to kill more bears in hopes it will reduce sheep predation on public lands. That is, killing public wildlife to financially benefit private welfare ranchers on public lands. It’s a worst-case example of wildlife management via politics rather than science, spits in the face of the Land Ethic and the N.A. Model. CO BHA is hard against it. What those in the know tell me is that bears are so vulnerable in August that so many would be killed the first couple of years that all subsequent bear seasons, which run concurrent with archery and rifle big game seasons, would have to be severely curtailed to compensate. Thus, bottom line, hunting opportunity would be greatly reduced rather than expanded. Everything about this bill is a lie. In CO at least, agricultural politics is among the greatest enemies of scientific wildlife management, thus of democratic hunting. Thanks for exposing it here, Stix.
in reply to: Wood vs. Propane in Tent #23445Paleo — For your needs as described, I’d stick with what you’ve tried and works. Wood stoves in canvas tents are a variety of heaven on earth … but in my experience only worth the considerable extra bulk, weight and hassle if you have a spacious tent and some down-time to collect wood, etc., and will be there for several days at least.
Remember Occam’s razor: When more than one solution to a problem appears, the simplest is generally the best. But I would get a 20# tank and adaptor.
-
AuthorPosts
