Is the Survival Hierarchy a Common Understanding?

Marion David Poff

Marion David Poff

Joined
Oct 8, 1998
Messages
5,403
I mean, do we all reference the same basic hierarchy when considering survival?

This is it, as I understand it, of course, the broad strokes, but it helps to break it down to this, for instance, when I am building a kit or pruning stuff from a kit.

Personal Protection
-- Clothing
-- Shelter
-- Fire
Sustenance
-- Water
-- Food
Health
Signalling
Travel & Navigation

And to that, as a way of understanding things that are truly multi-purpose, for my own reference, I add
Global
-- Tools
-- Resources (Items that you run out of, use up, have to replace ie; batteries, cord, etc

What do you folks do?

What do you think?
 
I agree with you mostly, the only part I change is the importance of fire, which admittedly isn't always possible, but I find is more necessary for me than it may be for others. Apart from that my metabolism demands putting water and food side by side. I run out of either I'm as quickly screwed. but that's just me. I know most others here are warm blooded, and can generate their own heat.
 
It is my understanding that Cody Lundin basically says it's all about maintaining hydration and body temperature. I guess I'd call that a different approach, but maybe not everyone would. The Sierra Club have their ten essentials, which is a kind of "one size fits all approach." I think I remember reading that Colin Fletcher (Complete Walker) said/wrote he didn't worry about about survival at all, because, he said, after the first few hours, it's just camping. So would you consider these the same or different than your list? I would.

So if there are 3 different approaches, then I'd imagine there must be many.
 
I've been taught not to think of any set hierarchy... instead, to be aware of myself, those around me, my environment and how they all relate to eachother. Too many times have I read/heard about folks who get fixated on this "sacred hierarchy of needs", only to turn a deaf ear to what their situation, body, and environment are telling them.
 
Apart from that my metabolism demands putting water and food side by side.
Click to expand...
Food is not side by side with water. That shows almost no understanding of survival. Food isn't necessary for 3-6 weeks.
 
I don't make or carry a specific 'kit.' I used to have a kit in a pouch but found it was either inadequate or redundant or both. I'm in the Colin Fletcher camp: take the stuff you need to be out in the woods and you have a 'survival kit.'

Even for a day hike, I usually take water, fire, warm/dry clothing, food(+/-), and shelter (+/-) in a bag or pockets. Extra cordage, wire, sewing kit usually. Always have knife, compass, and fire tied to my person. Just don't see the need for a specific kit although many 'pros' recommend it. Even the pack I take to work has this stuff in it.

The one place I see a kit being useful is in a combat environment where you might have to ditch your ruck. Be a good idea to have some sort of kit on your web gear or vest in that case.
 
Some people with medical conditions may find food and water of equal importance but in general that would be true. In some areas, fire may not be as important as it would be in colder climates but it shouldn't be hard with a little thought to determine the priorities for your own needs
 
udtjim said:
Some people with medical conditions may find food and water of equal importance but in general that would be true. In some areas, fire may not be as important as it would be in colder climates but it shouldn't be hard with a little thought to determine the priorities for your own needs
Click to expand...

Put a diabetic in a situation with strenuous physical activity and no sugar input and you can quickly have a collapsed diabetic in a coma.
 
This is all very good.

Just a few posts and alot to digest, so to speak.

I see the survival hierarchy as I expressed it as a general guide to the type of requirements that one may have to meet in the out of doors, as a sort of reminder that you have to take with you that which you will need.

I agree with those who have expressed that my list is not a die hard, 'this, then this, then this' type of thing.

Good stuff.

Marion
 
Rotte said:
I don't make or carry a specific 'kit.' I used to have a kit in a pouch but found it was either inadequate or redundant or both. I'm in the Colin Fletcher camp: take the stuff you need to be out in the woods and you have a 'survival kit.'

Even for a day hike, I usually take water, fire, warm/dry clothing, food(+/-), and shelter (+/-) in a bag or pockets. Extra cordage, wire, sewing kit usually. Always have knife, compass, and fire tied to my person. Just don't see the need for a specific kit although many 'pros' recommend it. Even the pack I take to work has this stuff in it.

The one place I see a kit being useful is in a combat environment where you might have to ditch your ruck. Be a good idea to have some sort of kit on your web gear or vest in that case.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 99%. I think it is important to have some essential stuff on your body in case you get separated from your pack.
 
Well, understanding the hierarchy involves understanding what can kill you faster, and addressing challenges precisely in that order.

This would be that order (more or less)

0. Trauma (this isn't quite on the list, because it's not always present... but when it is, it can potentially kill you faster than anything else.) You can't always address it, but you should be prepared to try.
1. Temperature (heat or cold can kill you in a few short hours... faster if they are extreme... and can quickly disable you even faster, making it impossible to survive). Maintaining your body temperature can involve fire-making, shelter, clothing, and all of the above.
2. Thirst. Dehydration can kill you very quickly. In an extreme environment, you could have not much longer than 24 hours, especially if your body isn't trained... but more commonly you will have several days.
3. Hunger. This is a distant 3rd. After 24-48 hours of burning your glycogen, the body will move to triglyceride metabolism and will burn your fat. An average man, weighting 80kg is packing 16kg of fat in his body. Assuming that you can safely lose more than half of that, without any permanent effects (you can lose more, really), you have 10kg of fat, or over 80'000 calories in reserve. Accounting for inefficiencies in resorption, let's make that equivalent to 20'000 consumed calories... or 10 days of average activity while starving. Your energy levels will certainly drop, and if the environment is harsh or you perform strenuous activity you'll use up more energy... but you normally don't have to worry about starving to death for a minimum of 2 weeks, and more likely significantly longer.
 
Last edited:
gnius said:
3. Hunger. This is a distant 3rd. After 24-48 hours of burning your glycogen, the body will move to triglyceride metabolism and will burn your fat. An average man, weighting 80kg is packing 16kg of fat in his body. Assuming that you can safely lose more than half of that, without any permanent effects (you can lose more, really), you have 10kg of fat, or over 80'000 calories in reserve. Accounting for inefficiencies in resorption, let's make that equivalent to 20'000 consumed calories... or 10 days of average activity while starving. Your energy levels will certainly drop, and if the environment is harsh or you perform strenuous activity you'll use up more energy... but you normally don't have to worry about starving to death for a minimum of 2 weeks, and more likely significantly longer.
Click to expand...



I mostly agree with you, but it's actually a bit more complicated than this. There are three energy substrates in the body (actually 4): ATP and creatine phosphate, glycogen, fat, and protein(+/-). ATP and creatine phosphate is used for immediate energy (running away from the bear); it's used up in 5-10 seconds. Glycogen is used for intense activity of short duration--anaerobic activity, say, chopping wood vigorously. Fatty acid and protein consumption occur with longer bouts of aerobic activity.

Interestingly, glycogen metabolism varies from person to person, mostly depending on their overall fitness level, health, and sex (F<M).

With aerobic activity, glycogen is spared somewhat. The more fit you are the more glycogen you store and the less likely you are to use it during light-moderate exercise (instead, relying on fatty acid use). Moderate to heavy exertion will use glycogen quickly for everyone. Muscle glycogen stores are depleted in minutes to a couple hours.

If you deplete your glycogen stores and don't eat carbohydrates, your body will use protein (your muscles) as a fuel source. You literally eat yourself.

This is an elegant system that holds a bit of 'quick energy' in reserve for periods of high physical stress activity, but usually relies on fat consumption (and consumed food) for lower levels of activity. Nice.

Regardless, you are right. You can go days and weeks without eating. I once went 10 days without eating in sub-zero weather. Lost a lot of weight. People with special medical conditions may have more difficulty.

The other lesson here is that it pays to be in good shape so you have extra glycogen on hand for emergencies. :thumbup:
 
nemoaz said:
Food is not side by side with water. That shows almost no understanding of survival. Food isn't necessary for 3-6 weeks.
Click to expand...

He said it was for him. He didn't mention you! Your "matter of fact" answer indicates you don't read very well and have some strange notions of human metabolism. It isn't the same for everybody (hypoglycemic, diabetes). ...and I have tried it, and you are wrong. Three weeks is pushing it and 6 weeks would put almost anyone in such a state as to ensure they made irrational decisions.
 
First impressions:

I want a *system* of equipment that will maintain my health until I can walk out or others can find me. It should all work together and for a survival kit, multiple uses are a plus: duct tape is part of my first aid supplies as well as boot, clothing, and water container repair; small diameter line is available for lashing shelters, fishing, making a fire bow, traps, or spare boot laces; a poncho is rain gear and shelter,and a bright colored poncho makes me easier to find or use as an aerial signal; a space blanket is a blanket, a waterproof roof for a shelter or a solar still. Etc, etc, etc.

First order of business: don't get in a survival situation in the first place. To me that means preparation and proper navigation. Next is leaving notice with someone you trust--- being missed is the first part of getting found!

Fire, shelter, and water are first on my list of needs. Navigation and signaling next.

Food was discussed and the best I have done is to add hard candy and something like a granola bar to my kit, along with food gathering tools-- line, wire, and a little fishing gear. You can live a long time without food, but you will lack energy, lose mental alertness, and you won't like it. The psychological aspects of not eating concern me as much as anything. A few days of little sleep, no food, dehydration and stress aren't the best thing for a positive outlook. If it is cold, the lack of food is much more of a concern.
 
I am going to agree with Magnusen here. I tend to generally think in order of Health (traumatic), Fire, water, shelter, food, signaling, movement and direction making.

However, this is all specific to the spatio temporal location. If I am in the south east texas area in middle spring - I am not going to worry too much about Fire and Shelter. Water, signaling and movement become more important.

TF
 
bruce said:
He said it was for him. He didn't mention you! Your "matter of fact" answer indicates you don't read very well and have some strange notions of human metabolism. It isn't the same for everybody (hypoglycemic, diabetes). ...and I have tried it, and you are wrong. Three weeks is pushing it and 6 weeks would put almost anyone in such a state as to ensure they made irrational decisions.
Click to expand...
Tell the military survival instructors. Or Ron Hood. Or just about every other instructor. Your response is however a pretty common one among the untrained.

If you have the mindset that you are going to die because you didn't get your bon bons or power bar for the night, you will. Surivval is all about mindset. Comfort is not a requirement and a rumbling belly is just that, discomfort.
 
Nemo and Bruce......

Cut the "BS pissing match" and let's learn from eachother, okay.

Nemo.... how does diabetes and hypoglycemia(sp?) fit into the food deprivation scenario?

Rick
 
Magnussen said:
Nemo and Bruce......

Cut the "BS pissing match" and let's learn from eachother, okay.

Nemo.... how does diabetes and hypoglycemia(sp?) fit into the food deprivation scenario?

Rick
Click to expand...

There is nothing to learn from Nemo – in fact he is dangerous. He is throwing out the names of people who should know better without a serious cite to their work. If he wants to see what the Army thinks, he should ask those at the U.S. Army Research Institute for Environmental Medicine at Natick, MA. I've been there.

Nemo, what is the number of days you've gone with 0 kcal.? Not 1000 kcal, not 600, but zero! I've gone three weeks. I know what it does to your ability to maneuver and make decisions and recover.

Magnussen, I won't relent for the sake of peace when someone is spouting dangerous rhetoric so don't bother with the "can't we all just get along" speech. This isn't about togetherness. If you want to contribute to someone else's demise, so be it.
 
king_rodney_celebrity_rehab.jpg


Why can't we all just get along?


Seriously,

Debate topics - just don't get loud with each other.

I love this forum because it is void of shouting matches.

TF
 
Not even going to begin with pissing matches here, but regarding the original topic, I really like what I have read from Magnusson, gnius, and DaleW. These gentlemen really make sense, and in more than just this post too.

I don't think there is much more I can add to what has already been said, but as mentioned before, it all boils down to "it depends". I wouldn't follow any set list of instructions for all given scenarios, but instead would prioritze my course of actions based on the given circumstances. For example, a warm climate would not need a fire immediately, and perhaps a shelter would come first; especially if the possibility of rain is present. Conversely, in very cold situations, a fire would be my #1 focus. Trauma or injury is very real, and if injured, getting that blood spout plugged is vital... far more so than a fire or lean-to. These are just examples, of course, and one could easily envision all sorts of curveballs thrown at them if in a real tangle in the brush. I cannot stress it enough that it is critical that one is able to assess his situation first, then (and only then) can he make the right decisions. Simply following a list may work well one, two, maybe half a dozen times, but there will come a time when the "list" fails you, and you need to be able to think on your feet. Afterall, the brain is the ultimate tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top