Stranded camper saved from starvation

SubaruSTi said:
When I was younger I had a dog that was my only friend pretty much he went everywhere with me. Now I have a family. I soon realized that a relationship with a dog is more in your head than an actual relationship. I still have friends that are in that same boat and refuse to advance their own lives because of a dog.
Click to expand...
This is YOUR experience. Others have a very different experience with their pets.

Chris Pierce said:
I really don't get it, was the man injured by the bear?
Was the man so poorly supplied that the bear was able to completely destroy literally everything the man had? Why would the bear eat or destroy the mans knife? Matches, lighter, fire steel, metal cup etc?



This may be a good warning for the ultra light crowd. You've got to have real skills if you don't bring extra gear.
Click to expand...

I don't get this either. I also don't understand why a loved one would wait an extra MONTH from the date he was supposed to come back to call the cops. There seems to be a total fail on his planning and prep.
 
This is one of my pet peeves. Around here, at least once a year, someone will:

-go into the back country and get lost.
-get attacked, often killed, by a bear.
-go into the back county and get caught in an avalanche.
-go into the back country and get stranded by the weather.
-etc...

Invariably, they will be described in the media as an "experienced" camper/hiker/hunter/skier/kayaker/rock-climber/whatever... when they are obviously not experienced enough.

I think this is clearly what happened to this dingbat. He over-reached his capabilities in a big way.
 
Hoping this doesn't get too lost in the muck, but a couple points.

Bear-Bag, depending on where he was in the shield, there may not have been any timber of a size to do so, or even make a tripod hang. Poor excuse to not have food in bear barrels, but there you go. Canoe damage, depending on the type of canoe, the bear flipping it might have done some real damage. lots of folks still use wood, or canvas canoes up there, and don't always understand the limits.

Guns, almost probably illegal where he was. Granted he could have gone through the permits required, but it may have been more of a hassle than he thought, or maybe it wasn't something he thought he'd need. Would you find me in that country without a firearm? No, but I have a rural background and half the required paperwork already.

The extra month. Trips out in that country can be really hard to judge. Maps are poor, rivers change, no-one lives out there. If he had planned a best case two months, worst case three month trip, and they waited to the end of the worst case window, thinking that he had enough food to get that far, maybe it makes sense.

Yeah this guy made some bad choices. First of which was a solo trip in one of the most inhospitable places on earth. Maybe he had it all figured out, and rolled the canoe and lost his stuff. Maybe he's telling a tale. Who can really say. If the cops don't even know, maybe the details are wrong. Wouldn't put it past someone to have embellished the story...
As for experience, in what I've seen, the folks that screw up the hardest are the ones who think they are experienced. Whos to judge? Either push the edge a little and buy it on a mountain, or watch re-runs of Bear, and have the heart attack at home. But that debate has been beaten to death already.
 
There has to be more to the story for sure. He lost all of his gear? What did he do? Eat his dog raw using his bare hands to tear away flesh? He had to have some of his stuff still around. If anyone follows up on this story please post.
I'm hoping this doesn't end up as a made for TV movie or motion picture. :)
 
That story makes a lot more sense. He didn't kill his dog until he was injured, starving, freezing, and bootless. And even then, it had been seven weeks since the bear attack.
He apparently he wasn't close to his family either, and they were used to him going away for months at a time every year, so that explains who they waited so long to call the authorities.

Also, it sounds like he was well prepared, two rifles, ammo, food, matches etc. Just not prepared for a bear attack, injury, or an extra month on a frozen river.
 
Chris Pierce said:
That story makes a lot more sense. He didn't kill his dog until he was injured, starving, freezing, and bootless. And even then, it had been seven weeks since the bear attack.
He apparently he wasn't close to his family either, and they were used to him going away for months at a time every year, so that explains who they waited so long to call the authorities.

Also, it sounds like he was well prepared, two rifles, ammo, food, matches etc. Just not prepared for a bear attack, injury, or an extra month on a frozen river.
Click to expand...

Yep. This is a much improved and expanded version of the story. The chronology of events makes much more sense. And details given lay to rest a lot of the prior critique points.
 
To quote the phrase: "It's ok to love your pet, not LOVE your pet."

Apparently some of you have confused this line.

It's human life vs animal life. He survived. I'd say he knew alot better than you keyboard jockeys. Take your mutts in the wood, not food for either of you, and let's see who walks out a few weeks later. Remember, the dog had no food either. You wanna watch your dog starve. You die, and he'll eat you. I'd say he was smart enought to not let the meat off the bones first.

You all are in massive denial, or LOVE your pets too much. Put away the peanut butter boys.
 
The story makes "more" sense, it still doesn't make a lot of sense.

And Jim, troll much?
 
AZ2AK, trolling is when you don't stick to the subject. Mocking fools not realistic enought to realize a pet dog is walking food in an emergency, and thinking the dog is a higher being have not starved their dog and watched what the dog will do to you. It inherently knows survival. Dead on the topic.
Trolling insults are for those who can't come up with a reasonable reply to a reasonable response. I note you didn't you had no reply to my comment, so I'll assume you are not smart enough to make a educated response. Hence the lame trolling response. I understand your sad predicament. Sorry.
 
Actually, your post had little to nothing to do with the topic at hand. Instead it was a direct attempt to inflame, hence the trolling point out - which you continue to pursue.
 
jimh0220 and AZ2AK, serious topics are inherently contentious. That doesn't mean we turn our opinions on the story against each other. Stop it now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top