Outside magazine does survival

[Buffalohump]

The November issue of Outside mag focuses on survival topics, including an interview with Bear Grylls.... FYI

Mark

 

[reconranger]

I won't buy Outside. I'll look at it standing in the isle at the supermarket...but I won't give them any money! It is biased toward the treehugging leftists who want to lock up all our wildlands in wilderness areas.......

 

[abo4ster]

I won't buy Outside. I'll look at it standing in the isle at the supermarket...but I won't give them any money! It is biased toward the treehugging leftists who want to lock up all our wildlands in wilderness areas.......

While our political views are probably the same based on your comment, I have come to the conclusion protecting more wild areas is a sacrifice I am willing to make for two reasons. (1) Our landbase is becoming more fragmented every day making management difficult, particulary prescribed burning - this can be seen as one of the root causes in the rash of wildfires in the last 10 years, not just so Cal, but FL, SW, NW, Rocky Mtn States. There are also other impacts in fragmenting our landbase. And (2) a university study I read several years ago demonstrated that in general, minorities in the U.S. do not have as much interest in protecting the environment as causcasians, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this country is becoming more of a melting pot everyday. So protect it while its there to protect as it will be more difficult as time passes.

It is funny how what we call 'development' in this country is the same thing we call deforestation in the third world. I believe there are many green conservatives out there that don't have a voice in the GOP which is a shame.

 

[reconranger]

Well, you may be able to say that where you live, but here in the southwest most of the land is in government hands already....and therefore vulnerable to being declared "wilderness"!

Look at a map of California and most of it is national parks and national forest. What most maps will not show is the huge volume of land that is BLM! Use to be that BLM land was happily "multiple use", but now even they have been taken over and there is plenty of BLM wilderness.

The thing for me is that I live in the desert, and nobody in their right mind travels far out here on foot......yet foot traffic is all that is allowed in a wilderness area. There is a good reason why they call it DEATH VALLEY! There are few places where motorized travel is more appropriate than in the desert. What happens with "wilderness" then, is that it is essentially locked up and accessable to absolutely nobody.....

 

[hollowdweller]

I won't buy Outside. I'll look at it standing in the isle at the supermarket...but I won't give them any money! It is biased toward the treehugging leftists who want to lock up all our wildlands in wilderness areas.......

Having my favorite deer hunting grounds and treestand I shot my first deer out of clearcut because it WASN'T a Wilderness turned me into one of those tree hugging leftists:thumbup:


But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. :thumbup:

 

[Evolute]

Quiet Bear,

I'm an example of someone who is very much in favor of conservation of natural resources, but far from the political left. While I consider conservation of nature important to me, I do not consider the government a good conservator of nature, and I favor private conservation initiatives, not government ones. A desire for protecting wild areas does not necessarily mean a desire for this to be done by the gov.

 

[DOC-CANADA]

Having my favorite deer hunting grounds and treestand I shot my first deer out of clearcut because it WASN'T a Wilderness turned me into one of those tree hugging leftists:thumbup:


But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. :thumbup:

My traditional gathering grounds were turned into an expressway.

Doc - another tree hugger.

 

[abo4ster]

Quiet Bear,

I'm an example of someone who is very much in favor of conservation of natural resources, but far from the political left. While I consider conservation of nature important to me, I do not consider the government a good conservator of nature, and I favor private conservation initiatives, not government ones.

I am a big fan of the Nature Conservancy, but there is only so much a private organization like they can do - even when they partner with the government and private industry which they frequently do, it is really on a small scale.

Hollow - I have nothing against clearcutting or even harvesting in national forests - it is the right harvesting method for even-aged species as are most pine, and there is no doubt deer "follow the axe" looking for edge effect - however, edge effect occurrs naturally as well. FYI, my degree is in forestry and I worked as a dirt forester for a timber company in the SE for many years supplying two pulp mills. I also am a certified burn manager in two states and have dealt in that capacity with an increasing urban interface. Unfortunately, in the last 15-20 years timber companies have been their own worst enemy in fragmenting their own landbase as most are spinning off realestate divisions to develop high value property - I don't fault them - it makes economic sense, but the bottom line is less natural areas. Obviously this isn't as prevalent in the West, but a fragmenting landbase due to an increasing population and 'development' is.

My original post was made as food for thought - that's all. Guys, I agree with you. I am not a fan of government involvement either!!! I truly believe there is nothing the government gives us that it doesn't take away first. However, I believe we are at a tipping point with our population and I am willing to make some sacrifices to keep what's left of our landbase contiguous.

 

[David E]

Going back to the original topic.......

Who wants to bet that Outside does NOT recommend a gun for anything and any knife "recommended" is a SAK or multi-tool affair ?

.

 

[hollowdweller]

Hollow - I have nothing against clearcutting or even harvesting in national forests - it is the right harvesting method for even-aged species as are most pine, and there is no doubt deer "follow the axe" looking for edge effect - however, edge effect occurrs naturally as well. FYI, my degree is in forestry and I worked as a dirt forester for a timber company in the SE for many years supplying two pulp mills. I also am a certified burn manager in two states and have dealt in that capacity with an increasing urban interface. Unfortunately, in the last 15-20 years timber companies have been their own worst enemy in fragmenting their own landbase as most are spinning off realestate divisions to develop high value property - I don't fault them - it makes economic sense, but the bottom line is less natural areas. Obviously this isn't as prevalent in the West, but a fragmenting landbase due to an increasing population and 'development' is.

QB,

Neither do I. I wouldn't consider myself as a "tree hugger" in the sense that I think every tree should be preserved. Nor am I totally against clear cutting. In a lot of areas it makes sense. (I never used it but I have a degree in forestry also:thumbup

National forests are managed by multiple use concept. I can't speak for people in other areas but in my area whether an area is designated wilderness or not depends in part on public comment to a large part. So if more land gets designated and you object you should participate in the hearings.

I have a buddy who was involved in lobbying for the WV Highlands Conservancy back in the 80's and early 90's when almost all hearings were attended predominately by timber and coal companies. He left the area and then came back in the late 90's early 2000's and went to a public meeting on the forest plan. He said that it had dramatically changed. It was predominately backpackers, hikers, hunters etc and they were calling for more protection of lands. Now some mountain bikers push for more land to be protected but not as wilderness because that would prohibit them, but in general around here there's a decent amount of agreement.

Perhaps my main area of concern as far as private companies taking timber and other natural resources off of public land is that often the public does not receive fair market value for the resources. Also in my state we have a tremendous amount of privately held woodland and by allowing companies to log or mine coal on public lands at discounted rates they are unfairly competining with private landowners and driving down the price they receive for their timber.

Perhaps one of the biggest giveaways and costs to the taxpayers was the 1872 hard rock mining law. This law has allowed corporate interests to loot our public lands and leave the cleanup to the taxpayers. It also puts mining companies who deal with private land at a disadvantage because the companies get such a pass on the price and environmental concerns.

Congress is working on revising this. It has come up before and been shot down.Read here:
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=319&Itemid=27

 

[Noshtero]

Going back to the original topic.......

Who wants to bet that Outside does NOT recommend a gun for anything and any knife "recommended" is a SAK or multi-tool affair ?

.

You're probably pretty close on that one.

 

[Buffalohump]

I didn't think a magazine like Outside would polarise people so much...

I consider myself a tree-hugger because I truly love the outdoors and the creatures that make their home in it. I figured most people here did as well....

Before you jump to any conclusions, hell yes, I eat meat, and I have no problem whatsoever with hunting (poaching is another story). Most hunters are very committed conservationists.

Mark

 

[ChadHahn]

Here in developer friendly AZ all the state land has to be put to higher use, which means development. This was recently put to the test when they wanted to build on "Fantasy Island" a mountain biking area.

The state is finally starting to realize that paving over everything isn't the best idea. I agree. I would like to be able to go out into the desert and not have to worry about ATVs and dirt bikes tearing around, tearing up and making noise.

I think that Outside has advocated the use of larger knives and why would they suggest guns? They aren't a hunting magazine, although they have talked about rifles in bear country etc.

Chad

 

[hollowdweller]

we have a good alternative for ATV's here:


http://www.trailsheaven.com/

 

[jackknife]

Teddy Roosavelt was a tree hugger, but I don't think he was a leftist liberal.

Thanks to him we have a park wilderness system at all.

 

[markv]

"biased toward the [treehugging]sic. leftists who want to lock up all our [wildlands] sic, in wilderness areas"


yeah cut'em down , all the trees,what we need a wilderness for anyway. bunch of weird plants , out of the way places where only outdoor freaks would ever go, of course on foot which is stupid when you can get there really fast on a four wheeler and cut some cool ruts and besides the racket runs off the bears.
the last i read about deserts they are nothing but sand, cool weird loner prospector like freaks and rattlesnakes , they should be exterminated, the snakes that is so we don't get bit when we get too drunk to stand up after polishing off a suitcase and a hundred rounds of 9mm, it never rains there so why would anybody wanna go there??? really belongs to the Mexican Gov. anyway, i think????

 

[Gerberblades]

I won't buy Outside. I'll look at it standing in the isle at the supermarket...but I won't give them any money! It is biased toward the treehugging leftists who want to lock up all our wildlands in wilderness areas.......

Outside was originally called Mariah and was started by the folks at Rolling Stone Magazine in the late '70s. It was a pretty good read back then. After a couple years, the name was changed to Outside and it became another slick, mainstream mag catering to yuppies and enviro-elitists. Kind of a travel magazine for the post John Denver crowd.

I think most agree that we need to have wilderness and vast tracts of undeveloped land. The problem is that there are a lot of competing interests and philosophies about how that land should be managed. In short, its the old conservation vs. preservation argument.

Reconranger is spot on about the desire to lock up Federal land. The mere designation as wilderness precludes many activities that we take for granted because any motorized access is virtually eliminated. For a unique view into the preservationist mindset, read about Dave Foreman (Founder of Earth First!) and his Wildlands Project. I don't think that is what Teddy Roosevelt had in mind.

GB

 

[Codger_64]

These days I am almost afraid to look too closely at the companies behind magazines and products I buy. I doubt many would pass my scrutiny as far as the political and social causes they back, and their treatment of "upstream" workers.

Magazine ownership and direction evolves for a fact. I was an early reader of TMEN (Mother Earth News) during the original ownership. I still occasionally pick up a copy from the newsstand if a feature article or author catches my eye. Same for Backpacker and a few other magazines.

Like any "for-profit" business they try to cater to the widest market share. Usually, this is not me. The ads inside tell a lot of the tale in this regard. They are directed at youthful athletic types who must be the ones with the most interest and disposable income. I haven't bought Outside magazine in some time. But the canoing magazines have followed pretty much the same tack.

I am an environmentalist from the "old school". I practice "no trace" camping. I like seeing wilderness as much as the next guy. But I believe in proper forestry management and public use practices. Climax forests are dead places as far as wildlife and plant spicies are concerned. And lead to wildfires. I believe that land use and land preservation can go to extremes in either direction. Neither of which is good in the long run for man or the environment.

Codger

 

[RescueRiley]

I have to say Why I'm no fan of bleeding hearts... I'd have to say I am very much in favor of consrvation efforts... I've sen so many of the areas I used to haunt when I was younger urn into strip malls and nonsence.... I'd like to make sure that there are still places for my son and oher future generations to enjoy.....Well said Codger.

 

[markv]

Outside was originally called Mariah and was started by the folks at Rolling Stone Magazine in the late '70s. It was a pretty good read back then. After a couple years, the name was changed to Outside and it became another slick, mainstream mag catering to yuppies and enviro-elitists. Kind of a travel magazine for the post John Denver crowd.

I think most agree that we need to have wilderness and vast tracts of undeveloped land. The problem is that there are a lot of competing interests and philosophies about how that land should be managed. In short, its the old conservation vs. preservation argument.

Reconranger is spot on about the desire to lock up Federal land. The mere designation as wilderness precludes many activities that we take for granted because any motorized access is virtually eliminated. For a unique view into the preservationist mindset, read about Dave Foreman (Founder of Earth First!) and his Wildlands Project. I don't think that is what Teddy Roosevelt had in mind.

GB

i will check it out. thanks again for the heads up.
buzz
an interesting read, also found more on global issues.
buzz