Ultralight hunting: toward a coherent definition.

[Poser]

Does anyone besides a small minority of hunters even know what "Ultralight Hunting" is or means?
If Field and Stream posted "What is Ultralight Hunting?" from their FB page, what kind of responses do you think they would get?

So, Dave writes an article attempting to define what it is for the ultralight backpack community, who may not understand that you need to carry heavy things like optics and weapons and still operate with an UL ethos. UL hunting lacks a definition. He's attempting to define it.
I fail to understand why this is an offensive subject for some you.

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

My sheep hunt in AK this past AUG was a total let down, from the guide to the lack of game. Equated to an awesome $25,000 camping trip. I have hesitated posting the story of the hunt as I know the roast will begin. "You're not hunting for the right reasons", "your priorities are out of line", etc, etc. I've tried to rewrite it but it always ends up the same.

I'd really to read your story. Tell it and don't mind anyone's opinion. I've been waiting for you to post it since you went.

 

[dotman]

For me the big question is: do I have to punch people in the face to be a successful hunter?

Yes, otherwise go back to your mom's basement

 

[pgk]

Does anyone besides a small minority of hunters even know what "Ultralight Hunting" is or means?
If Field and Stream posted "What is Ultralight Hunting?" from their FB page, what kind of responses do you think they would get?

So, Dave writes an article attempting to define what it is for the ultralight backpack community, who may not understand that you need to carry heavy things like optics and weapons and still operate with an UL ethos. UL hunting lacks a definition. He's attempting to define it.
I fail to understand why this is an offensive subject for some you.

I don't think anyone finds the idea offensive, just somewhat impractical. Hunting has this whole other way bigger dimension than just walking around. The 'ethos' of it is going to vary on location/terrain, species, season, etc. That's why it's probably virtually impossible to establish the rigorous standard that Dave implies is the goal. You can make generalizations about ballpark figures for different types of hunts: BC sheep, Colorado elk, Sask whiteys, NWT caribou, but they're all going to vary widely in terms of what kit you bring and as a result, what 'UL' means in each context. 'UL hunting' (regardless of how 'success' is defined) is going to mean vastly different things to a guy hunting MD in Montana than a guy hunting DS in the Mackenzies. The concept is still in its infancy...most hunters couldn't define it or even agree on parts of it.

Dave is probably pissed because everyone's chirping but noone's willing to pony up and actually read what he wrote...lol!

 

[Yellowknife]

Not to distract from the general arguing here... but I found it interesting to see a gear list from someone that originally came at the sport from a strictly backpacking point of view. Another extremely experienced backpacker and adventure traveler that has just more recently come into the hunting realm is Andrew Skurka. His article on gear might suite some of you better.

It's free too!

http://andrewskurka.com/2014/backpack-hunting-gear-list-colorado-big-game-early-fall/

He's a user of Kifaru gear it appears... perhaps he's on this site?

 

[American Grouch]

DaveC,

I've done both, UL backpacking and hiking as well as a lifelong hunter, I've measured success in inches and 'meat pounds' but I've also found that as humans we tend to want to apply a means to measure 'things' because it helps us quantify them.

IMO, as a hunter, a successful hunt is measured against what I put in my freezer, of course there are secondary reasons all of which have be previously pontificated.

As a backpacker what is the measurement? A nice view? Miles covered? Satisfaction of immersion in the natural world? Well how do you measure that? Or, how do you measure how something looks? How rugged something is without scientific tools?

I came to believe years ago that the measuring of gear in ounces was a means to measure the endeavor of UL hiking and backpacking. Has to do with weight and keeping it slim of course, but became a monster in its own right because it became the activity rather than the act.

Measuring ounces became the activity.

With that in mind and if true then of course the same mentality would apply the same applications to 'ultralight hunting', the problem is it doesn't fit entirely. Because hunting has a defined 'measurement' within it which is based on success of the hunt. Because there wasn't such a clearly defined measurement of success within the backpacking community it was easy for the 'measuring of ounces' to become the determining factor of 'success', that measuring provided a easy numerical way to 'measure' the activity.

Sorry to be verbose, but in my opinion the UL pursuit, of which I was a part for a number of years, the ounce measuring became the activity rather than the original activity of backpacking and hiking. It transformed itself from something with a need to the need overcoming the something, sounds more confusing than it is. Simply put the activity which was backpacking, was displaced by measuring the ounces of the activity, the how overtook the end desire and became the way success was measured. I have a BW of XX blah blah blah, it was easy because there was no other clearly defined measurement of success within that community short of miles traveled or trails traversed. Humans measure things, and while warm fuzzy sentiments around sunsets and pretty mountains are certainly a part of backpacking, they are not measurements.

Hunting, successful hunting, is measured on whether or not the targeted animal was taken, it is a pursuit with a defined desire, to kill an animal, if we are honest with ourselves. Of course the journey is enjoyable, but it isn't successful unless we took what we came for home with us.

I guess what I am trying to say is (Ultralight Hunting) if viewed in the traditional sense of (ultralight measuring) is a doomed endeavor from a traditional ultralight mentality, you simply need more to hunt the backcountry than to simply pass through the backcountry, as a result ounce measuring while useful to an extent isn't the end goal of the activity, killing something is and as such will remain the ultimate 'measuring' for successful hunting.

Attempting to utilize products and strategies from UL perspective in a hunting arena have validity to a point but only to a point, beyond which it becomes impractical.

I can appreciate the attempt at defining it but both pursuits are rather individualized even though they have similar components, as a result there is likely good cause for some concepts and products to make the leap one pursuit to the other but I don't see it ever becoming a defining concept or even measure of success as it is often portrayed in the UL BP world.

And I did pay and read.

 

[5MilesBack]

I fail to understand why this is an offensive subject for some you.

The subject is fine, in fact it's a great topic. But I failed to get past all the rhetoric, dazzlement, and verbose to even get to that subject. Kind of like when you see a guy with a purple mohawk. Do you really think his intent is for people to hear what he has to say? Of course not......he wants everyone's attention focused on the mohawk. That's why he has it.

 

[tipsntails7]

Ok.... Show of hands, who as actually read this article??
I also thought the summary was a bit off putting, I then read the entire article and was pleasantly surprised by it. There was exactly 3 in the article that I thought were "overwordy" if that's even a thing. THREE single words over an 11 Paige article.

It was an interesting article that I would have actually liked to discuss different points and contrasting opinions but it's now turned into a shit show about peoples vocabulary, getting punched in the face, apparently getting shot and other BS.

 

[westernsloper]

I didn't read the article, but I wasn't one of the people who had a problem with it. I did purchase the same author's review of the Paradox Evolution before I bought a Unaweep pack. It was an excellent, down-to-earth review. I'm an English teacher, though, so maybe my standards are different.

Honestly, I think the biggest mistake that happened in this thread was that the original link was to an article no one could read without paying for it. And then people like me jumped in to talk about random stuff. I dunno... I think that's just how the internet works.

 

[Poser]

I read it (admittingly, for free while the dropbox link was still good)

 

[snowcamoman]

I'm a BPL member and read the entire article. It was well written and has some good pointers and discussion topics contained within the writings. The game of UL anything is about either having enough money to buy the absolute lightest whatever widget it is, or being able to do without. I'm sure some guys can hike and hunt a lot of country with a really light pack and a UL tarp with no spare anything to carry. I try to go for as much comfort and practicality as possible without jeopardizing my safety out there. If all else fails, I pick up my non UL Satellite phone and call for a pickup ride out. It's good that there are guys with a lot of hiking experience sharing what they've learned over the years. It's easy to get caught up in having the lightest widget, but actually getting out there and doing it is more important and will get you farther when hunt time comes.

 

[Yellowknife]

I read it. I got a kick out of his use of "charasmatic megavertebrates" to describe big deer and elk, but otherwise it seemed reasonably plain English to me. The concept of needing a weight standard is something I would debate, but his argument was reasonably well thought out and supported. Keeping context in mind, it seemed like it was a reasonable explanation of why UL hunting requires a different metric than UL backpacking as explained to a backpacker.

I also read it before everyone got all wound up. Had to go back and look for all the supposed big words. Didn't find very many and no dictionary required.

Typical paragraph:



Not seeing the dazzelment there.

 

[rayporter]

andrew wrote well written piece.

but when i came to the optional writing instrument i knew he had never filled out a tag.

and i can darn sure learn from him if i just pay attention. i can learn from others mistakes too, [if i just pay attention]

 

[5MilesBack]

Yes, would have been nice to read the entire article from the start instead of the summary page. But after reading the summary page it certainly didn't entice me to open the entire article even if it was free. So I guess the article was completely different than the summary? Where on earth did the summary come from?

 

[Mike7]

Yellowknife, thanks for the Andrew Skurka link...that was interesting. My gear overall is a little bit heavier than his it appears, but most of the spots where I am heavier is with things/choices that I probably wouldn't change...because I feel they allow me to be more comfortable for longer in the field or better prepared for hunting (e.g. mildly bigger shelter, more versatile kill kit, better gaiters & boots for cold wet late season use, having a rangefinder, more water carrying ability, bigger sitting pad for longer periods sitting and glassing, etc.).

 

[charvey9]

Whoa.

After reading the previous 6 pages, I couldn't help but buck up to read the whole article before giving an opinion. In short I found it very well written, not too wordy, and made some great points. I really am not sure where all the discussion over excessive use of big words came into play.

Clearly I do not think members of Rokslide were the target audience, but if you can take the perspective of a UL backpacker or someone not familiar with hunting I think it is a great intro article to backcountry hunting. It is something that I would suggest my non hunting or frontcountry hunting friends to read. I especially like the summary in the final paragraph, comparing backcountry hunting to frontcountry hunting. While there is nothing wrong with either, the distinction between the two activities is lost on many.

As for my opinion on UL hunting, I had never thought about assigning a number to benchmark the activity. When seeking a weight, my goal these past few years has just been "lighter". I haven't checked the scale in awhile, but last spring my pack was 32lbs including 2 liters of water and food for a weekend trip. Essentially I used the same loadout for longer trips, the only increase being additional food. For me this was a good weight, containing everything I needed for bowhunting in Oregon. Cutting out some non-essentials like my sidearm, camera, batteries, etc I think I could break the 25lb mark and still be perfectly safe and comfy for 3 and mild 4 season hunting in my home state. That being said, I'm quite certain my assembly for the 10 day drop hunt to Alaska next year will be significantly burlier. The article speaks well about tuning your kit to the conditions as required.

I can't speak for others, but my pursuit of UL extends a bit from my slightly obsessive and competitive traits that drive most of my passions/hobbies. Once I make the commitment to do something, I tend to take it to extremes. I also just like gear. In the 5 days or so per week that I can't be in the woods I enjoy reading and discussing equipment. Finding something lighter that will serve the same purpose is often reason enough for me to give it a try. I can not completely explain why but I do take some pride in having an "ultralight" setup. I believe it to be a combination of achieving a goal I set out to do (dropping weight), enjoying the gear I use, and being able to get by with minimal resources.

 

[BroodBuster]

Sounds like the summery wasn't an accurate portrayal of the actual article.

I've got a few buddies that are writers who are always bitching about editors and that may be the case here.

 

[Jarrod Renaud]

Just listened to Outdoors International Podcast with Steve Speck, if I recall his pack comes in well under 30lbs

 

[jwb300]

One observation on this thread...

Often the most controversial threads or topics involve people who are ill informed. We see this with the anti's and green groups all the time. Obviously they have no understanding of hunting but they constantly attack us and our way of life.

It would appear as though many people who have posted here are ill informed - i.e. They haven't read the article.

Anyway the point is - if you aren't informed on the topic hold your criticism - there is usually more to the story than you perceive.

Cheers,
JWB300

 

[BroodBuster]

I think we all read what was provided by the OP