My skepticism has nothing to do with the sting ray envenomation, but the general circumstances of the trip. I was Park Archaeologist at Channel Islands National Park from 1985 to 2001. I can assure you that nothing remotely like his described trip occurred during that time. Indeed, if you are doing any kind of research, or any kind of activity for the NPS, you will not be traveling to the islands in the manner described in this incident. You will reach the islands on an NPS boat or a chartered NPS plane. Your departure and arrival will be tracked and noted. An obvious and important rule is to always travel with your gear, however you may reach the island. During my time with the NPS, I have never traveled any other way, nor has anyone else. Certainly the work CK describes did not happen after 1985, and I seriously doubt it happened before.

The only incident I know of, and I am well acquainted with the archaeological research history of the islands, would be an incident that happened on San Miguel Island about 1964, involving an archaeologist named Charles Rozaire. San Miguel was owned and managed by the US Navy then, and Rozaire and his crew were working under contract for them. Someone in the Navy "forgot" they were on the island, and their return transportation was about four days late.

It is axiomatic to carry a bit of extra food when you travel to the islands, but four extra days is a bit much. This was not a problem for archeos, though. When the Navy plane finally showed up, they were living on abalone and other shellfish foraged from tide pools, following the example of the people they were studying.

So, again - what island, when, and what was the project? It just may be a fairy tale.....

This is a pretty egregious hijack...Should we continue on a separate thread? I do apologize, but this really pulled my chain, as you can probably tell.

Sooooo, I take it that referenced post from 'CK' was deleted from the thread?

It rained every day of my vacation, so I was surfing u tube for knife tests. I came upon one where a couple of young guys 'invented' a big knife they called the 'Wolverine'. It looked like a version of your Russian knife, but with a point.

Hey, this is how real life campfire conversations go........
Now for a ghost story

I agree with the sentiment that a good machete is an excellent all-round survival tool. Thanks to the original poster who gave the link to the machete web site ... quite helpful!

NightHiker - it's interesting that you have a Spetsnaz machete. I've always been curious about that tool. I have not had time to read the link where some guy panned it ... but i would be cautious about ridiculing any item that was developed by an active special forces team (esp. the Spetsnaz). It's possible that the tool could be made with a better metal alloy - dunno' if that's the problem. But they have probably given a lot of thought to the length, width and weight of the item. Likewise, I'd be careful about buying copies that are a different size than the original Spetsnaz machete - unless the replacement item has been extensively tested. Let us know more about the Spetsnaz machete when you get a chance.

Pete #2

I don't think that specific tools or kit are just developed for Special Forces team. They usually just go shopping at the local outdoor sports shop, fishing tackle shop or gardening centre hoping to find what they are looking for in green or olive drab.

Too often folks get taken in by the 'Special Forces' marketing hype.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhAVfneM_jI

It some times gets to the point of being embarrasing..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5prM5fHNYk

There are exceptions though such as the SAS counter terrorist underpants, as they aren't no ordinary Y-fronts.

You guys could be right ... and maybe I've been the victim of marketing hype. Why should hype just be limited to the USA or the western world?? It probably isn't. It's possible that the Spetsnaz tool is not associated with the Spetsnaz at all, and maybe it's just a clever gimmick from a salesman in Russia.

However, if the tool is actually genuinely used by those special forces, and it's dimensions/weight/alloy have been selected for the purpose for which it as designed ... that's a different story. If it's authentic, then it's design has probably been perfected over time. I have no idea how to establish this.

In any case ... NightHiker has at least demonstrated that it's a very robust survival tool. That's not a bad first step.

Pete #2

One of the features I like about machetes is their lower cost. On the website I posted, they offer an assortment of 5 Tramontina machetes for $29...for all 5! I have two of the machetes in that assortment, one with a wood handle and one with a polymer handle. They are made in Brazil where machetes are as common as mosquitos, and of good quality for the money. I bought a Wetterlings axe, but now they're so expensive that I'm afraid to use it. My Ontario CT-1 takes it's place on my pack. My brother carries the fossil remains of an old Woodsmans Pal in his truck. It comes out in the fall for clearing a shooting lane on his farm where we sight in our guns.

Exactly. A machete combines a lot of differing requirements. The steel has to be hard enough to cut well and hold an edge for a acceptable amount of time, soft enough to sharpen easily, malleable enough to never shatter no matter how hard you swing it into a rock. If you work around cane cutters you find out that these guys are constantly sharpening their machete. Often with a file. They chop hard for fifteen minutes and then throw on a few strokes of the file on. Under such heavy use machetes are expendable and may only last a year or two.

As machetes they only last a year or two. They get sharpened down and become large knives, butcher knives, kitchen knives, paring and pen knives. Wood handles are a plus because they can be filed down with the steel.

This coming weekend (rain predicted again) I'm going to the big box builder store to buy a small mill file for my pack. I have a mammoth one in my garage, but I don't want to lug it around.