Hacksaw had been using a signature quote from Mors Kochanski to the effect that the bush is inert.

BruceZed posted: “Not to digress to much but in my opinion the bush is not really inert, it is neutral when it come to whether we are going to live or die during a survival situation.”

I invited both of them to make this idea a new topic.

Seeing no new topic posted, I started this thread.

I do not believe any natural environment is either inert or neutral. A Coast Guard search and rescue diver put it well: “The ocean is trying to kill you.”

I think the same is true everywhere in the outdoors whether on land or sea: nature wants to digest you. Unless you act to prevent it, the nutrients in your body will be lost to nature.

It starts with either heat loss or dehydration, and goes on to direct attack by creatures large and small. Even the part of nature represented by your own body demands water, food, shelter, etc.

Inert? Neutral? I don’t think so.

What do you think?

Thanks.

i too have questioned - in my mind - that signature.

i assume - always a bad move - that 'bush' means nature or the whole outdoors.

merriam's dictionary defines inert:

1: lacking the power to move

well, nature grows and while growing, moves. now of course nature doesn't move to cincinnati. but nature does overgrow anything in its path - see mayan or cambodian temples.

2: very slow to move or act : sluggish

now this fits nature.

3: deficient in active properties; especially : lacking a usual or anticipated chemical or biological action.

nature very much has a 'usual or anticipated chemical or biological action.' in many cases, extremely predictable.

so, in my mind, by definition, inert is a mixed bag. but i think it is incorrect.

now if he's trying to say that nature has no emotion and has no interest in any anticipated outcome, i would agree with that.

in my mind, nature - the bush - is what it is. it is not positive, it is not negative, it just is.

pretty heavy stuff for so early in the morning.

I too have looked at that signature and dismissed it as simply wrong.

The saying that the NPS puts up on trail info signs I think expresses it better. "The mountains don't care." And that's nature at it's most benign.

In reality, there are elements (insects, reptiles, arachnids, and mammals) out there that are trying to eat your lunch, or eat YOU for lunch. They are actively seeking your demise or just wanting to abuse you for their survival benefit. It's without malice but it's active.

So you could expand the topic considerably.
The mountains don't care if you aren't having a good time.
The mountains don't care if you think they are beautiful.
The mountains don't care if you die here.
The mountains don't care if you are injured here and die somewhere else.
The mountains don't care if your wife never sees you alive again.
The mountains don't care if you have to cut off your arm to save your life.
The mountains don't care if you fall thru the ice and die of hypothermia.
The mountains don't care if that rattlesnake never gets to consume you as prey. (Some other creatures will though.)


etc.


I suppose you could also find an analogue in daily life.
The other driver doesn't care.
The cop doesn't care.
The guy who designed this highway doesn't care :-)

Inert is not a good term to describe nature because it implies that nature is powerless. However, a good argument could be made for neutral.

Nature in general doesn't care whether you live or die. It can and has provided for our well being if/when we have known enough to take what we need. OTOH, nature won't give us this bounty on a silver platter, we have to take it and keep it and we may need to compete with other inhabitants of nature who are better suited.

Just as we can consider a salmon we catch in a stream to be part of what nature provides, the grizzly who's food we just took is also part of nature. Nature "in general" doesn't care whether the bear gets the salmon, we get the salmon or the bear gets us. Neutral is a good term.

I'm not going to debate this one because Mors Kochanski is somebody who I really respect and admire...and he's a fellow Albertan!

The quote comes from his 'credo' which I'll quote here. I've done so without permission and have no affiliation with Mors or his school.

The bush is neutral. Is is neither for nor against me. My comfort depends on what I can do for myself and how much I know about using the bush materials around me. Becoming angry, depressed or unhappy does little to help me in my situation. I will try to think positive thoughts and find ways to be thankful for what I have. When I am not sure of what to do I will stop, relax, and think out the situation before I act.
I realize moving about when I do not know where I am or where I am going will make it difficult for others to find me.
My concern at this moment is to make myself comfortable for tonight. I shall shelter myself from wind, rain or snow and build a fire to warm up.
I will not let fear or panic rule my mind as this only works against me. The bush is inert. It is incapable off doing me harm.

Nature is a cruel mistess,just like I like 'em ;-) It kinda reminds me of an old song by Twisted Sister..... What you don't know can hurt you. Nature is all about change and balance. She will try to absorb you even as she provides for you.

-Bill Liptak

How is he defining "bush"? That last line seems more like someone convincing himself it's safe to go to sleep. Too bad Mors isn't here to explain the context of that statement.

If he'd left off those last 2 sentences it would be a great statement.

I always thought that signature was a comment on U.S. politics....

Seriously, this is a very thought-provoking and practical topic. My interest and activities to be better equipped were started by the realization ("awakening" might be an even better word) that the world, people, life, God don't owe me ease and comfort and, as others have noted here, the natural world is indifference in general and many times hostile in particular to not only my ease but my life.

Don't ask me how much of my life was spent under the delusion that the world, nature, society, government owed me ease and plenty. I'm glad for this forum.

Living things may or may not be trying to kill you. The universe doesn't care.

-john