Re-reading this again I think we've all been on the wrong track. He never even mentions living off the land. He thinks opting to head out of town is macho ramboism and necessarily entails endless suffering.
Anyone who's ever camped knows this is not true. Chosing to stay on your rooftop in New Orleans, or Tabasco, or in the path of a California forest fire, won't mean you'll be comfortably sipping wine by your fire, And leaving, then camping out if you can't find accomodation, doesn't mean you'll be shot by a sniper (huh? why would a sniper be after you?) or lugging gallons of petrol for fires (he thinks there is no wood in the forests).
To accuse anyone who points out he's talking nonsense of introducing aggression, is to ignore the whole spirit of his mail, it's a bitter hate-filled diatribe against people who's views he's invented.
His whole mail makes no sense. What was all that about endless courses? or cleaning a rifle for no reason? What does that have to do with being ready to leave and not have to rely on the kindness of strangers.
As has been pointed out it's all projection of his own mind onto others. "I'm no rambo but call myself 'Dogs of Wars...'.
simon