I thought this was an interesting and well-written article about survival strategies.
Popular mechanics article

"MYTH: TRAPPING DINNER

Animal snares? Leave all that to Grizzly Adams. “Search and rescue rarely finds a victim whose cause of death was starvation,” says survival instructor David Arama."

Very interesting article. I like the fact that they point out you will most likely not starve to death. This is something I'm trying to drill into my nephews head!

That was one of the best articles to come out last year in Popular Mechanics. I liked it alot.

True enough, but I have a hard time believing that a person going without food for 3 days is as capable physically as the same person who has eaten. And while I have yet to see any studies done on what effect, if any, lack of food has on hypothermia, I'm betting that eating something helps ward it off.

Presumably this article is aimed at people who do not know much, if anything, about survival. To then suggest that they not bother to learn about potential food sources is, IMO, a mistake. By all means, teach people to stay put, make a shelter, build a fire, and set out signals. But to then tell them to sit there while the fish are jumping yards away in the lake? Or to watch the squirrels running up and down the fallen pines while you wish you had some snare wire and the knowledge to use it? Not good advice in my opinion. A few fish hooks, some line, and some snare wire take up little room, and will always be found in my kits.

Good article otherwise.

While I don't know if there has been a formal study, there is plenty of documented evidence of reduced mental ability and fine motor control if you are sucking on internal reserves. Sure, you might survive if you just sit still and have enough water, but if you break your neck going to get water because your brain is fuzzy due to lack of food, you're still dead. You can get used to it, but lets face it, most of us are used to three or four meals a day, and that is what our body expects and it takes a while to adapt.

I'd call the several weeks on body fat a semi-myth. That is for people sitting in a rubber life raft, waiting for the PBY to spot them and hoping it really is a PBY and not the Japanese, while sucking on a pint of water a day under the sun. (To give you an idea of WHEN the figure comes from.)

The only saving grace I can give to that statement is that most people are found in under two days.

Absolutely. I also don't know the exact physical figures but I know digesting food alone warms a person up.

Before my last physical exam the doctor made me fast for the entire day before. My last food was Sat. evening & by mid afternoon on Sunday I felt chilled. Without the calories coming in it had a an effect on me & I was sitting in my house watching football. How much worse would it have been if I had been hanging out in a snow cave?

Shelter/Water/Signaling come first for sure, but hunting & foraging should be part of our plan.

Amen. ....and, as you mentioned, what will you do with all that time on your hands? After the basics are taken care of, just sitting and watching (or realizing they're there) potential dinner entrees without some kind of effort seems naive and (like so many who depend on Government to wipe their rear ends) pitiful.

I particularly liked the shelter suggestions. I carry a Coghlan's Survival Bag. It can be used as an immediate shelter; hop in and pull it over your head. It can be set up as a closed end tube tent. I liked the idea of building a debris hut and having the bag inside. Also having some hot rocks inside is a great idea! I have read of a fire bed but not of semi hot rocks used above ground to heat a debris hut. I also liked the suggestion of using a space blanket to line the top of a debris hut and having the shiny side inside to reflect heat from your body or a fire. I wonder if the heatsheet works as well as a space blanket for this application?

Good info!

I agree 110% with Norad. While it is usually true that you can survive for 3 weeks (+/-) without food, such a survivor will be extremely weak and his mental capacity will be seriously compromised. He then makes poor decisions and if he dies from them, then technically he did die as a result of no food intake although folks like Cody Lundlin (sp?) won't put that in print.

The "don't worry about procuring food" advice is really for those who don't know much and don't practice their skills ahead of time, IMO. If you know how to gather & cook some fish or small game IN AN EFFICIENT WAY then you are in a much better position to make good decisions & have the physical energy to execute them.

If I decide based on the situation to not try to procure food, them I'm certainly in no worse position than the guy who doesn't know how in the first place.

A very informative article projected to a mainstream audience who probably would never have thought about carrying this gear or adopting the right mentality about a subject most of us take for granted and are constantly prepared for. Whilst we huff and puff about eating about local wildlife, lets just give them the time to digest these bite size pieces of information that come after the kim tragedy and when their awareness grows, then you can provide or fine tune them for a better state of readiness.
Nonetheless, a good starter read for a vast subject. Thanks for the link

I agree with what has been said here. Some people think the whole fishing tackle & snares concept to be a little "boys life'ish". On the Other hand Hank Williams Jr said it best "A Country Boy can Survive!" For this Country Boy the fishing line, hooks, etc stay in my kit. Just becuase I'm stranded and awaiting even "certain" rescue; why wait hungry for days on end? Not to mention these items take up almost no room and weigh next to nothing.
I acctualy had a guy on a hunting forum tell me that he did need to worry about constructing a shelter, becuase there were few situations a credit card and a cell phone couldn't get him out of.
I thought to myself, Unless this guy is hunting in his back yard, he is an idiot. Someone will probably pull his dead "ars" off a mountian someday. <img src="/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

I used to carry one extra-large orange garbage bag, but after reading this article, i'm going to take two.

They make great improvised shelters, and they are light and cheap. I still won't bring a survival blanket, too flimsy and ought to tear in the wind or simply during manipulation.

A heat sheet seems nice, I just didn't come across one yet in stores.

I like the article. I like it mainly for the fact that it's an article that contains a lot of wisdom and is brought to public attention via a popular magazine.

Do I believe the "forget about food because almost no one dies of starvation" idea is correct? Not really. To me, that's like saying "almost all rescues happen in 72 hours or less, so there's no need to prepare for more." As soon as one of us takes this mindset, good ol' Murphy will make sure our butt is the exception to the rule.

Is food the last item on your list of things to worry about? Absolutely, but it's still on the list. Snares, fishing tackle, and rations don't take up much room, and they sure as hell make all the other activities you have to do in a disaster much more tolerable.

In my opinion, this article is meant for the people who constantly neglect preparation. This article should not sensationalize the low priority of food by telling people to ignore it altogether. Unfortunately, that is sometimes what it takes for the uneducated general public to understand a concept. On this forum, I don't think that applies to many of us. We're more the type that want to turn a disaster into "nothing more than an impromptu camping trip" (as quoted from Doug's articles).

I guess I don't read as much into that Grizzly Adams jibe as some here. I agree that food should be lower in priority that other things. I'd be more concerned about shelter, warmth, signalling, and water. Only AFTER those things are covered would I move on to finding food. I carry enough spare food to cover my needs in the short term (I hope!) "Initially, other things are more important" is the point I think the article's authors were trying to make. Maybe headlined less than optimally in an attempt to grab your attention, but a valid point none-the-less. I thought the article was quite good myself. Especially considering it came from a magazine not normally associated with outdoors survival.

I found the red X on the wing (first photo) to be interesting. I seem to remember that an X on a wing meant that the crash was "old" but could not be removed. Perhaps someone with SAR could comment on that.

I see that they pooh pooh the bow drill, but then go on to recommend a magnesium block ("metal match"), saying that "The 5400 F blaze ignites even damp tinder." While both are certaintly better than nothing, neither would be my first choice. Magnesium shavings are absolutely miserable to work with. Why don't they recommend carrying a Bic or two in their kits? To their credit, they do recommend the excellent REI Stormproof matches.

I don't mean to be too hard on them. As I said, overall it's a good article. But if we take the time to make suggestions for improvement, then maybe the next article will be better still. I'm pretty sure this website gets a lot of hits from writers looking for ideas.

I know there is a "Rule of 3", and someone expanded it to something like:

3 minutes without air (I can't hold my breath that long!), 3 hours without shelter, 3 days without water, 3 weeks without food, 3 months without "Wilson", 3 years without rescue.

I'm sure that 90%+ of us here are prepared for at LEAST an unplanned overnight. I'd also wager that 80% of the population arent. With that, I think that putting out the basic "Fire & shelter first" information is good. I'm sure we all have easy access to at the very least fishing tackle, even when venturing to the local supermarket (I pack my PSK everywhere, just like my wallet). So, this article surely isnt intended towards us. IN all honesty, I probably wouldnt be too concerned about aquiring food until probably day 2. And, even at that point, I may set up a fish line or snare or two, but, the largest source of food are most likely insects. No one wants to eat bugs though, cuz of fear factor <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />. But, after day two, I'd probably start fishing & snaring, due to sheer boredom. After all, you can only sit around in front of a fire for so long <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Hypothermia (IIRC) is a result of your bodies inability to maintain internal temperature. Your body maintains internal temperature by burning fuel (eating). I am no Doctor or Medic but when I had hypothermia I managed to get into a tent and bag and still couldn't stop shaking. With great difficulty I was able to heat a quart of water, make powdered chocolat milk and drink it down. Because it was warm? Because it was fuel for my metabolism? I think a little of both.

Jon

I didn't quite understand this part: "Think of an automobile--even one mired in snow or mud--as a survival ark. It is windproof, waterproof and an excellent source of insulation . (You can tear up the seat cushions.)"

I am kind of assuming that if you're alone, you can sleep in either the front or back seat, and rip up the other one for insulation. But if there are more than one of you, it seems that ripping up the seats would be counter-productive. I'm not exactly sure what the seat stuffing is made from. If it came out in sheets, maybe.

And if you made a brush shelter, you could fill it with the seat stuffing and spend your time pulling it apart and fluffing it up as insulation to put around you, like a hamster's nest.

But that isn't using the car as an 'ark'. Cars themselves aren't insulated, other than a fraction of an inch of foam attached to the headliner.

Am I missing something here?

The references to food not being necessary: This may have been to assuage the worries of the non-prepared, to indicate that food was not a main priority.

Personally, I would think that having food with you would tend to calm most people. In a possibly life-threatening situation, you need to focus on the important stuff, like shelter, fire and water. If you've got food, that's one less thing you'll be stressing over. And you know that most people would worry about not having food, esp if they had children with them.

My basic opinion on these magazine type articles on survival, if well done, give your average American something to think about, without pushing them over the edge into "that's too scary to think about" country. If it pushes a thousand people to actually buy a $4 6-volt lantern, a couple of disposable lighters and two cheap mylar blankets from WallyWorld and put them in the car, they are ahead of most of the pack. And who knows, it might get them thinking more about it, and lead them them to ETS!

KI6IW: "I found the red X on the wing (first photo) to be interesting. I seem to remember that an X on a wing meant that the crash was "old" but could not be removed. Perhaps someone with SAR could comment on that."

That could be true. The first page of the article says that the magazine had the wrecked Cessna towed to the site for the survival scenario. Someone probably "dinged" (that's what they call it!) their plane, and PM gave them a few bucks over salvage for it.

Sue

I am guessing what they mean is: one can use a car as a sort of tent to spend the nights in.

If its cold and wet, I would probably just stay inside the car (provided the car has intact windows and is habitable). Why build a shelter when there is a perfectly good one already?
Now if the car was somehow damaged, turned upside down, etc, then I would probably use parts of car to build an expedient shelter and use things like wires for ropes, insulation from car seats for warmth, gasoline for firestarting and perhaps even a battery to provide light.
I have seen Les Stroud do just that with parts of an airplane when he "crashed" in Canadian winter forest.

"But that isn't using the car as an 'ark'. Cars themselves aren't insulated, other than a fraction of an inch of foam attached to the headliner."

It still provides a wind break and shelter from falling rain and snow.
There is usually an extra layer of insulation above the headliner as well as insulation behind all the plasic panels conering the inside of the body.
You could pile snow up on three sides of the vehilce to help make insulation but I would leave one side open to get in and out.
Those reflective sun shades poeple put in their window on hot sunny days will reflect heat back in also.
You can also insulate your vehilce, I bought a roll of the reflective insulation from a hardware store that looks like bobble wrap with aluminum foil on the outside. They had a display where it was folded up into a littel pouch so that you stick your hand in and it refelcts your body heat and your hand gets warm. I removed all the plastic panels from inside my old truck and taped this covering everything and seldom needed the heater after that as it was always warm in the winter after a few minutes of reflecting my body heat.

Having an intact car for shelter is better than not having it. I've used my car for overnights on a few occassions and it does get cold inside, but not as cold as outside.

I don't understand this tearing up the seats for insulation thing. If you're thinking and planning, supplementing the car with sleeping bags or blankets seems like a better use of resources than dismembering your car. After the storm you may be able to drive out if you still have a car to drive. I've added a cheap fleece bag to my kit which along with the cheap "Italian Officers" wool blanket I got through one of the on-line surplus dealers I should be able to stay quite warm. Another body/person inside the cab would just add more shared bodily warmth.

That's why I always carry a couple of decaf coffee bags in my outdoor PSK. I might look into swapping them out for chocolate milk mix if I can find some that are reasonably small.

I actually had powdered milk packet from REI and Chocolate milk powder on side. (start of a week in the Smokeys) The whole milk powder packets from REI are great, more food value.
I never expected hypothermia, Feet wet, about 28degrees. Suddenly realized I was in big trouble, confused, weak,shaking uncontrollably. I was lucky that I didn't just collapse. It took forever to put up tent and heat stuff. Don't want to go through that again.

Jon

You should write up a detailed account of your experience, including lessons learned, and post it here somewhere. It would be an extremely useful read.

When projecting a possible situation like this, I always remind myself that everyone I've ever heard interviewed who had to (or simply wanted to) eat ants said they were "spicy" and "kinda tasty, actually". It's the formic acid in them that gives 'em a little tang.

Now, if you've eaten ants and it was the worst experience ever in your life, just keep it to yourself! I may need to eat ants someday and I need a clear mind about it. <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

If I were a typical unprepared person that knew nothing about survival as most people seem to be, I may try to put the insulation from the backs of the seats into the windows to try to better insulate the insides.. then again, if I knew anything about the way insulation worked, I may think about stuffing my cotton clothing with small bits of seat cushion insulation to try to insulate myself from the cold instead of the whole car.. Just some thoughts looking at the article from the prospective of someone that might not be in the know.. which I belive most people have agreed is the way you haveto look at it from..

I really liked the article.

I'm going to take what seems here to be a fairly unpopular position and say that not only can a survivor go 3 weeks without food, but probably even longer, so long as they have access to decent water and shelter (dry & warm).

I've thought about this for a while, and did some research on fasting (consuming water, but no food). Fasting has been commonplace for thousands of years and has proven medical benefits. Researchers have found that even thin people can successfully fast for 30-40 days or more without serious consequences . They even say that people fasting tend to feel better and have more energy after 4-7 days of fasting than they do in the first 2-3 days.

Here is a farely comprehensive article: http://www.answers.com/topic/fasting .

My own view is that surviving is the act of taking care of basic needs such as first aid, obtaining shelter/warmth, finding water, and signaling for rescue while staying put and being as "findable" as possible.

If those in a survival situation have time/energy to fish, trap, and hunt, more power to them. Doug mentions in his PSP description that he didn't think fishing gear was all that essential, but he found buyers expected it, and figured fishing might provide a calming influence. I"d agree with that so long as the survivor doesn't put themself in any danger of falling or getting wet/cold. Plus I'd agree that the phsycology of survival is often as important as the physiology of survival.

Truth be told, if you really needed to consume some calories, turning over logs looking for worms and grubs to eat would provide calories without much risk, though it won't be as tasty as fresh fish.

I hope the holidays find all my ETS friends safe and happy,

Ken K.

If I was cold and I had a vehicle I am not sure I would want to expend the energy to build a shelter that is may or may not keep me warmer than a car.

Your operative term is "can." Physiologically you are probably correct. But two serious concerns come to mind: (1) the impact on survival performance, and (2) why would you plan on that?

I have personally fasted for some time (two weeks on one occasion) to see the effects and benefits. After the first few days there are some benefits in terms of mental alertness and positive feelings. After that it's downhill! At least for me after 10 - 12 days things began to look grim. Muscular weakness, confusion over simple tasks, etc. The gurus who do this are in situations with minimum demands on physical and mental resources. Survival, IMO, would be a much different story. Things you would want to be able to do, like maintain fire and gather water, could become dangerously difficult. Which brings me to the second point: why plan for this?
You mentioned in your post several reasons to plan for food gathering - even if only an edible plants card (which I always recommend). Building confidence by planning, learning and practicing (PRACTICE!) food gathering makes it feasible to mentally endure a long term isolation waiting for rescue. The protein may not be the biggest benefit of a 4 oz. fish! <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I don't know what is the standard, but I have flown in law enforcement aircraft and seen old crashed aircraft out in the boonies that I KNEW were several years old. The wings all had bright orange X's on them...

> 3 months without "Wilson",

That's not a euphemism I'm familiar with.

He's referring to a movie starring Tom Hanks (the name of the flick escapes me right now). It's relatively recent, within the last 6 years. Hanks is stranded on an island and one of the items he finds is a soccer ball or volleyball (made by "Wilson"). He draws a face on it and refers to [him] as Wilson.

That movie would be Cast Away from 2000.