Some of us have wondered about the content of the survival course attended by the lady featured in the recent North Rim Grand Canyon rescue....

This brings up the question - Are there any standards? How does one know if the instructor is qualified? What determines qualification?

It seems right now that survival instruction is pretty much the wild west - anyone can put up a shingle -"two months ago i couldn't even spell 'survivval' and already I are an instructor" and away you go.

Does anyone rate the various schools and courses? track the experiences of the graduates?

Have we even had a thread before discussing this issue? Do we appraise the various offerings that are out there?

Of course ETS is itself such a survival service - offering succinct and essentially mainstream, almost always correct advice (IMHO).

This isn't to say there should not be controversy and differing opinions about the various aspects of survival - controversy is essential to any field of knowledge that is vital and growing.

Just my $0.02....

Around here the schools usually state the instructor´s background (more often than not military survival instructor). They also post an agenda of the course (or courses if there are more levels).
That agenda allows to evaluate the course on basic level.
Based on those agendas I decided that the courses would be almost worthless for me (ETS and this forum have a big part in this). However I can imagine that the course may be dangerous for the student even when the course is good. The mindset is along the lines of "Now you are in a situation where you need a certain skill set to survive. We´ll teach that.". None of the courses I looked at had the topic of "How do I avoid needing that skill set in the first place" on their agenda. OTOH climbing a hill and making a phone call to get evacuated may defeat the purpose of a survival course.

I am not aware of any common standard, though some very good standards are available (BSA Wilderness Survival Merit Badge standards to name just one).

While a course may not be needed, the opportunity to practice skills in a realistic environment (with an appropriate safety net) is invaluable. For people in large cities, these may be the easiest way to accomplish such training.

Being retired military, and having extensive SERE training and experience, I can say that many former military do have some training, but their focus is usually a bit different. And doing something is very different from teaching something. I can say that the BSA Wilderness Survival Merit Badge standards are appropriate for 99.99% of the people out there. Go to a local Scout Shop and buy the pamphlet, it is good. It is totally in keeping with what Peter Kummerfeldt taught at eh Air Force Academy and with his book. It is also in keeping with Cody Lundin's book and what he teaches.

Survival (wilderness or otherwise) should be based on priorities of survival (not always in the same order):

Shelter: Preserve your core body temperature, learn how to build shelter in the environment you will be in.

Water: Understand the need and the physiological effects of dehydration. Learn methods of procurement and purification appropriate for the environment you will be in.

Signal: Carry the appropriate tools for signaling. Mirrors, whistles, fires, but also the longer range and technical tools if the environment requires it.

I would also include planning and the understanding of the psychological aspects of survival.

If the survival school begins to talk about evasion and concealment, run away, unless you are a member of the military (but they have their own schools for that) or plan on the need to evade law enforcement.

Food is low on the list of priorities, and not in the BSA list at all. Your purpose in a survival situation is to be found, and procuring food eats up energy quickly. Unless you have no hope of quick recovery, you have little need to learn about snares and traps or hunting. Are these skills good to know? Yes, but they have little application for most people in most situations. If you are a pilot in Alaska or Canada, I would learn about food procurement.

I believe that ETS can provide a resource for people looking for such training, and a way to evaluate whether the training is appropriate for them, but only based on what is either advertised or comes from previous attendees. A sort of clearing house of information. It would require people who do attend to post evaluations, and that would require a standard criteria for evaluations. Otherwise it is just anecdotal reporting.

Dougs advice from the courses section on this sites home page:

>Nothing beats hands-on training. Good survival training significantly increases the odds in your favor. It's also a lot of fun and can be a character building experience as well.

Except where otherwise indicated, most of these companies offer general wilderness survival education, as well as a myriad of other related courses. Some offer these courses at multiple locations, not just at the address listed. Most can accommodate groups or organizations and many will custom tailor a course to your requirements and hold it at a location convenient to your group.

Note also that many civic, outdoor and wilderness sports oriented and aviation organizations, community colleges, universities and the like offer survival courses. A call to area outdoor sports specialty shops will often turn up a number of local options. While the quality varies, most are pretty good, reasonably priced and even the worst one could imagine would still be much better than just relying on book knowledge.

The are many "outdoors" schools and courses that are aimed more at developing character than teaching survival skills. Organizations like Outward Bound and others do an excellent job, and most of us could benefit from such an experience, but if survival knowledge is your goal, aim for a school or course that is geared towards survival. Some may also be designed to help you develop and grow in the same way as do these others, but the emphasis is on survival and survival skills.

Investigate the course and schools you are interested in thoroughly. Ask for references from prior students and check them out. When assessing references, take into account their experience level vis-a-vis how they rate the experience. Ensure the curriculum and instructional philosophy matches your needs, interests and physical condition. Find out who, exactly, will provide instruction and what is their background and experience.>

qjs

What I would like are some mini courses. Basically, pick a single skill, and practice it.

For example, I "know" how to start a fire using a ferro rod. I've read about it. I've watched videos of it. I've done it. But only a few times. And only in perfect conditions. Could I do it if things were wet and windy outside and I was in dire physical condition? I'm afraid not. Maybe, if a miracle occurred, but I wouldn't bet on it. I just need to practice more. A mini course, say maybe 6 hours out in the field practicing, would certainly help out my confidence.

Same thing for knot tying. I tie a lot of knots. It's a hobby. I've got ABOK and several other knot tying books. I've got lots of different cordage to practice with. But honestly, if I don't practice, I start to forget even some of my favorite knots. It's funny - the knots I always remember, and fall back to if I haven't practiced for a while, are the ones I learned in Boy Scouts decades and decades ago. I never seem to forget those. For example, I don't need sliding knots terribly often. But I've learned some really neat ones over the years. Locking loops and all kinds of really functional stuff. But what do I end up remembering and tying when I go on camping trips? The tautline hitch I learned in Boy Scouts. Not that this is a bad knot. I could use a once-every-six months mini course on knots. Probably wouldn't even need a course. Just a group of folks getting together to socialize and tie knots. I'd be more prone to do that regularly than sit at home by myself practicing.

I can't see myself paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars and sitting through a multi-day survival course at my age. I dream about doing that, but realistically, it's out of the picture now. When I go hiking, it's all day hiking now. I don't backpack for days at a time anymore. And when I day hike, I always take plenty of survival gear. I could spend the night out, even in bad weather, relatively comfortably. That doesn't make me an expert. It just makes me someone who is prepared.

Yes, we did have a thread about it. I asked about accreditation organizations, and you pointed me to the Association for Survival Schools (nope). Yes, you, hikermor. Got find yourself this definitely not. Justice is mine!!!

Chaos, I provided the initials for the Association for Survival Schools, the same way that hikermor did so without editorial interference. If anyone found the abbreviation objectionable, then I say they need to look into themselves for an overactive imagination. The sin is in them, not in my words.

Google says: "No results found for "Association for Survival Schools".

The closest Google found (dropping the quotes) was: International Association for Safety and Survival Training (IASST) at http://www.iasst.com/ But IASST is mainly focused on maritime survival and safety. They say they've been around since 1980.

In the US, the The National Association For Search And Rescue (NASAR)[1] is sort of in this direction, but it is on finding those in distress, not staying out of distress.

So, no luck so far, as far as I can see.

[1] Their website ( http://www.nasar.org/nasar ) says:

"Government agencies and non-profit Search And Rescue Teams use NASAR's material and certifications to build credentialing programs for their organizations and produce highly skilled searchers that work within their communities and are available for mutual aid regionally and nationally."

Gosh,that was a long time ago. I believe the group is now known as the Professional Association of Survival Training, but I could be mistaken (improbable as that may seem).....

Perhaps someone should just "ring up" Cody, Les, John McCann, Greg Davenport or someone and ask what organization if any they belong to?

Seems a legit question to ask. .

Although I question the legitimacy of any organization with a basic acronym which is essentially the "butt" of many jokes. (if you will)

This thread was prompted by the recent news articles about the "North Rim lady" who was alleged to have attended a survival school, but who did virtually every thing wrong.

Years ago I worked on the body recovery of a group of three winter backpackers who had gotten into trouble on a previous excursion, attended a survival school (allegedly)and then went on this trip, which ended in their abandoning their companion to die by the side of the trail. Essentially, they did nothing right.

On the other hand, there are numerous epic tales of people who survived with no background in survival training who did enough right to get a passing grade from the School of Hard Knocks. There are probably also a lot of people who attended some survival school or another, paid attention, applied the principles, and enjoyed long and productive lives.

Is survival training, as presently applied, worth the time and money? There are surely some decent courses out there, but how is one to tell? Dead men tell no tales....

I thought quite a bit about that.
Probably the expectations on the results of attending a survival school are wrong.
The school will provide their students with a situation and resources to allow successfully completing the course. It´s basically the students fault if the student fails. Mother nature may not be that generous. Survival schools - hopefully - take care to make sure their customers survive. Mother nature may not care.
The scenario in the course may also not be a training comprising the right things (e. g. stay with your vehicle or stay put if you are lost). If one does not do it in training one may not do it in an emergency.
Survival training can provide basics for surviving but it is not likely to provide the ability to make good decisions under pressure.I think it would take additional approaches to get the willingness to do some prior planning (e. g. collect info about the expected road conditions or plan an alternative route) and train making decisions under pressure (not neccessarily survival related).

Not sure what makes a good survival course vs. learning on one's own. Surely there's some value in acquiring local knowledge of the flora, fauna, geography and perhaps meteorology if one is to go out "exploring". I can also see some value in learning local laws and regs, and for a few of us a table of local repeater frequencies would be useful. Other than that, learning basic wilderness survival skills isn't too hard to do on one's own, as the compendium of material from which to study is vast, and I've never had a problem making up cotton ball tinders once I learnt how much salve to put on one so's it would take a spark and ignite, and trying various methods under moderate to extreme conditions in the backyard before attempting to test same in wilderness setting. But I suppose that doesn't really answer the question.

To me it seems that a school/course worth it's salt will take you to places where folks have actually had to get in the sh!t and get out. This can be simulated, but the program won't be worth much if it isn't a proper mock up. SHTF school is a good example of how students are put into the real world model and shown how people actually survived the situation. If I were going to spend any more money on training, I'd be looking for a course like that set up in a given context. For them, it was literally a war zone.

Otherwise, it was easy enough figuring out most of the skills on my own, or with minimal instruction from others who'd figured it out. The rest was just learning gear selection and use, and then doing it. Not a great deal of difference between spending the night in a plastic bag in the back yard in the middle of November vs. up at elk camp, except that I can make adjustments as I go in the backyard as needed to figure out what will work and what is a waste of time, but we call that modeling the theory.

No one who is a legitimate survival instructor in NA that I have ever met, taught with or talked to at any Survival/Bushcraft Gathering has ever mentioned any organization they are a member of.

Every so often I have heard talk about it as a way of pooling liability, but every organization I have seen formed in NA, turned out to be 1 individual trying to make themselves seem more legitimate, that they are by forming an organization and making themselves the "legitimate" acclimatization organization.

To form such an organization one would have to have a true consensuses from a wide range of Survival/Bushcraft/Primitive Technology Instructors about numerous topics including Skills, Terminology, and sadly even simple Naming after Bushcraft USA LLC Trademarking the term "Bushcraft"). This action meant that few Instructors/Survival Schools in Canada would want anything to do with a new US Based Organization as it either would not allow us to continue to use the Term Bushcraft (which we do) or forced us to pay royalties to use it.

This is a really bad thing. It is sad that someone chose to divide and profiteer off of what is a rather ubiquitious term across a broad spectrum of practitioners. It is strange to me that somehow a person or organization is allowed to trademark what is a very, very old term. It isn't as though they made it up like George Eastman did "Kodak". It seems as though the commonsense is lacking in the agency granting the trademark.