Carry more in your pack or break laws for survival?

[Marble]

I read through some of this stuff. I think the premise is fairly silly to begin with. If I were to use the "follow the law" rule as the OP states, I would be dead by now for getting creamed by a car. I have no idea what I would do if I were in a crosswalk and the light said don't walk when you are in the middle of the street. Guess I'll wait until it says walk again.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[mt terry d]

Is any individual above the law?

The answer is obvious to all but slaves.

 

[long hunter]

Is any individual above the law?

The answer is obvious to all but slaves.

According to our Gubbermint wiz bangs NO ONE S ABOVE THE LAW

 

[WV Mountaineer]

Not wanting to completely derail any other topics I am starting this thread. Not sure what to name the thread, but this is named how I see the issue.

I think that it is more important to ensure that you have everything that legally allows you to self rescue yourself from inclement weather during hunting. Obviously we all know that sometimes there is nothing you can do and God is gonna call you home. But where are people willingly to draw the line for survival. I will carry more items with me that allow for self rescue and no items that are not allowed. So in this case the item that caused a dust up is fire starting items when fires are banned. FS and BLM will not cut you any slack if you start a fire during fire restrictions. Obviously, with all the people hitting the SOS on electronics today, there is a pretty loose consensus on “life threatening”. And that seems to make people believe they can do and go wherever they want.

So my simple premise is that if I am responsible for myself out in the wilderness during a time that fire is banned, I am not going to rely upon fire to save myself. And since I will have to carry other items that make me more able to survive, meaning more weight, I am not carrying anything to make a fire.

Is this the only line that people are gonna cross that is fine, but my comment is where you draw the line? If you are willing to simply have a fire, why not be willing to take an atv back into the woods to save yourself? Why not trespass to make it easier to a road? Why not do whatever? And do you do something full willing to turn yourself in after for any law you broke? Or your assumption is you did it and you didn’t get caught so no harm no foul?

I will not be surprised if I am alone in this. I am just wired that way. I am not willing to be lazy or unprepared. I do a whole lot of things others don’t do because I would rather deal up front and not after. But this is not something I care what others do. I will say it again, that I have said before, I have literally seen 100’s if not a thousand violations of hunting laws in my lifetime. I have only called a warden 2 times, first was a rifle poached bull during archery and later for someone being completely belligerent about being in a 4 point draw unit with an OTC license. Never got a call back, so decided I won’t call CPW anymore for any offenses. So in short I don’t care what anyone else does out there.

If it requires a fire to live, I’m building a fire. Why anyone wouldn’t is beyond me.

The Guberment isn’t God. So, allowing them to determine if I live or not isn’t going to happen.

You must be young /er. You certainly don’t understand the value of life to have asked this question.

 

[mt terry d]

According to our Gubbermint wiz bangs NO ONE S ABOVE THE LAW

Except themselves of course

 

[Justin Crossley]

I agree a lot of the laws are ridiculous. I think auto park in cars and back up cameras and cell phone laws are all overkill. But as a law abiding citizen I am not gone break them. Somehow in CO we have a lot. We have people that voted to have wolves released in my backyard. Not in your backyard. But I can’t do anything about those. But I will take extra gear to not need a fire. Because I have to carry extra gear I don’t carry fire stuff. Obviously if I am camping and carrying everything I have a stove and a way to start it. But when I leave camp for a hunt, weather a spike or base camp, if I can’t have a fire I don’t have fire starting stuff with me.

If you had a family member in the car with you and they had a medical emergency, would you drive them to the hospital at exactly the speed limit, or would you drive as fast as you could to save them?

I know what I would do.

 

[cal30_sniper]

I’ve never been in a situation where I needed to start a fire to survive. But I’m not going anywhere in the backcountry without at least two means to start one.

This thread is based on a logical fallacy that the only way to prevent an illegal fire in a non-life threatening situation is to remove access to firestarting materials. There’s another option called self restraint that doesn’t leave you in a situation to die if things turn unexpectedly south.

It’s dumb to go into the backcountry unprepared. Looked at alternatively, if SAR had to pull someone out of a desperate situation caused by their willful choice not to carry basic survival equipment, I’d think they could be liable for the cost of the rescue. Is that gonna be cheaper than a ticket for an illegal fire that didn’t burn down the entire forest because you’re not a moron starting uncontrolled fires?

 

[Mtndawger]

Everyone commenting in this thread should refer to the Shoot2Hunt rewarming drills. Or other rewarming drills. Easy to google them. The OP question is a good one and valid regardless of your position on it. The high level of scorn for it is astounding to me. Too many comments making it into a diatribe against the system and the personal rights of rugged individualism. “Me first” if you will. It’s not an either/or proposition. It’s a this/and proposition. The reality is that it’s a part of a bigger question: which to me is what is the best way to survive? I have been through enough situations that I choose to be prepared for all scenarios. It’s not hard to do. They make this cool new stove called a jetboil ( less than a pound) A few hot cider or hot chocolate packets, a freeze dried meal, an extra under layer, a very warm over layer and a simple space type blanket is a far better choice than fire. Full stop. Even if you forgot or chose not to bring your rain gear.

 

[cal30_sniper]

Everyone commenting in this thread should refer to the Shoot2Hunt rewarming drills. Or other rewarming drills. Easy to google them. The OP question is a good one and valid regardless of your position on it. The high level of scorn for it is astounding to me. Too many comments making it into a diatribe against the system and the personal rights of rugged individualism. “Me first” if you will. It’s not an either/or proposition. It’s a this/and proposition. The reality is that it’s a part of a bigger question: which to me is what is the best way to survive? I have been through enough situations that I choose to be prepared for all scenarios. It’s not hard to do. They make this cool new stove called a jetboil ( less than a pound) A few hot cider or hot chocolate packets, a freeze dried meal, an extra under layer, a very warm over layer and a simple space type blanket is a far better choice than fire. Full stop. Even if you forgot or chose not to bring your rain gear.

Nobody is saying you shouldn’t have both, except the OP. He’s the only person recommending staying in only one circle of the survival gear and preparedness VIN diagram.

 

[Mtndawger]

Nobody is saying you shouldn’t have both, except the OP. He’s the only person recommending staying in only one circle of the survival gear and preparedness VIN diagram.

You’re proving my point. He is asking a question and laying out a position either out of ignorance or provocation. No need to bite on the provocation by attacking him. Simple disagreement suffices.

Edit: a third option might be he is simply curious about where folks stand on it.

 

[BullNuts]

This nation is turning into a bunch of bootlickers. I don't need some asshat in washington or denver or wherever deciding "laws" based on who-knows-what that may end up killing me. If that means being an outlaw and starting a fire to save my life, F-em. It's not about being a rebel, its about being a critical thinker for oneself.

Im a law abiding citizen. Not saying all laws are bad or that they should be broken carelessly, but we as a people should retain some element of independent thinking as it relates to life threatening situations.

This… Be a critical thinker and use common sense in any life threatening situation.

 

[stumblinhorse]

I guess this thread isn’t gonna go away, even tho the mods asked me to step away.

Couple of things. I didn’t provoke anyone, I simply said I don’t carry a means to start a fire when it is banned. You all can do whatever you want I don’t care. I didn’t start this thread to have an argument, I started because the missing hiker thread was becoming an attack on me and the mods told people to get out and discuss elsewhere. I got called a “douche” and they locked it.

I am not young, I have been in the backcountry in emergencies, I have been medivac’d to a hospital from 6 miles back. I have hunted for many years, shot my first deer with a bow in Reagan’s first term.

My premise is that I carry more stuff to survive so I don’t need fire. Exactly as mentioned above, stove, blankets, coats, poncho’s etc. I don’t carry fire starter when it is banned. My choice, make your own, it is America, as of now, you still can choose.

 

[coyotekilla]

To the op... in short you sir are the reason McDonald's coffee has a hot warning. If I'm in survival mode, laws get tossed, ill poach, fish without a license, and build as big of a fire as I can in hopes that I'm found warm, dry, and fat... that's all

 

[cal30_sniper]

You’re proving my point. He is asking a question and laying out a position either out of ignorance or provocation. No need to bite on the provocation by attacking him. Simple disagreement suffices.

Edit: a third option might be he is simply curious about where folks stand on it.

I’ve done no such proving of points. Carry all the rewarming gear and hot cocoa and whatever else you want. That doesn’t mean you also shouldn’t carry a couple ounces of water proof matches or a striker with packaged tinder. Belt and suspenders. Not carrying fire starting materials because they don’t want to start an illegal backcountry fire is only logical if they’re a certified pyromaniac with zero restraint. I question how someone made it through life up to that point if that’s the legitimate case.

Heading to the backcountry without some means of firestarting is dumb. That’s not attacking the OP, just stating that it’s a dumb decision. Plenty of good people make dumb decisions every day, but most of them don’t die on a hill in a public forum trying to reinforce the nonsensical reasoning behind them.

I reiterate my point that that kind of negligent lack of preparation could be viewed as a contributing factor leaving someone civilly liable for a SAR response cost, especially coupled with public statements reinforcing this decision as intentional as found many times in this thread (a stretch, but to illustrate a counterpoint to the “can’t pay for an illegal fire ticket” point that was made by the OP).

I have read all 10 pages and the nonsense he started in the other thread. I still haven’t seen someone say “don’t carry any other gear to survive, just start an illegal fire so you won’t be cold.” I have seen a lot of people say “taking the option of being able to start a survival fire off the table is dumb.”