Not even CLOSE! A hurt companion or kid requires a lot more than just carrying - they double your water, food, and shelter requirements, and unless they're unconcious, they contribute to the situation by either ofering advice or requiring comfort. and a hurt companion requires medical attention that neither Bear nor Les could give, since they don't carry any first-aid gear with them.



The entire concept of intentionally putting yourself into a life-threatening survival situation with no backup is by definition one gigantic stupid act. Don't get me wrong, I respect Les' commitment to showing real survival techniques that could really work in a real-world situation, but let's face it - intentionally risking your life to teach somebody how to not risk their life ain't the brightest move in the world.

Nor do I think wasting time trying to make a slingshot out of your underwear is a MENSA-qualifying activity.



More realistic than Bear, I'll grant you, because Les doesn't climb on stuff and avoids water travel, both of which are the riskiest things that Beat does. But simulation? No way; again, I cite the camera, not as extra weight that he carries, but as a passive spectator for whom Les has to put on a show while he's out there. Running his own camera gear is a huge drain on Les' energy, both in carrying the weight and in setting up and staging the various shots. Les has often had to make dangerous climbs or treks through dangerous terrain, set up the camera, then go back and do it again so he has footage of himself doing it.

Of course, since Bear has a camera crew doing that stuff for him, he's got the bennefit of human companionship, and someone right there who can call for help if he does break his neck sliding down loose scree that even the greenest newbie climber would avoid like the plague.



No more so than Les' side show. I take them both with a grain of salt, because they are both there specifically for the purpose of staging a survival situation for a TV show.



Well, I hadn't heard the thing about lawyers, and I couldn't care less about either man's "credentials," but it's obvious that Bear has got a camera crew and a safety team near him at all times when he films. To me, that doesn't make him any less credible than Les, just more cautious, which is ironic considering that most people consider him far more reckless than Les.

Who is more reckless, the guy who risks his life for a TV show alone and lost, or the guy who risks his life for a TV show with a safety crew watching him?

I don't consider either of them to be any more or less reckless, more or less credible, than the other; their recklessness and credibility simply comes in different flavors.

I'm going to suggest that we put this into the "respectfully disagree" category. I think Bear is a sideshow freak with questionable honesty; you think he's comparable to Stroud.

But I do have one thing I have to comment on:



Oh, I'm sorry, you get no consolation prize. The right answer is, the PLB is the back up plan.

Les also carries his Sat Phone, though in the episode where he was in a lifeboat for half the show he showed that he couldn't get a signal most of the time.

If you want to see what happens to someone that goes into the wilderness without a back-up plan, check out Grizzly Man. Now if Man vs Wild, needs a jackass-like warning at the begining, what does the documentary Grizzly Man need ?

I have actually seen that there is atleast ONE good tidbit of survival information, e.g. using your watch to find North. But mostally I take it as if it is just another outdoor entertainment show. Like the Croc hunter.
cheers

Hi Polak,

I was avoiding this topic but finally decided to throw my 2 cents in.

My personal opinion of Bear is that he's a charismatic guy with a military background, who is very physically fit, using what he knows to create/maintain a sucessful career in the television industry as an entertainer. Les Stroud is no different.(i'll get to him in a minute )They are both actors, and stars of their own shows.

I think that for the sake of entertainment he takes many foolish risks on his show and that's what sets so many people off about him. There aren't very many of us here who would behave in the same manner if faced with the situations he places himself in. But, considering his training and skill level his odds of being hurt are certainly less that one of us attempting to do so.

For example, I'm not a technical climber and would never dream of attempting a chimney climb up a crevase like he did in that canyon in the desert. But, he IS an experienced climber and does just that. I think the fact that he doesn't issue some sort of cautionary about trying these types of high risk activities alarms and angers some folks concerned that someone out there will wander off and attempt to copy him, especially kids. I think that concern is a valid one, and he (and Stroud) have a responsibility to warn their audiences "Dont try this at home, we're professionals" because after all, parental control of children is practically a felony these days.

Personally, I consider both his show AND Stroud's show as nothing more than entertainment with some "survival" mixed in. Both employ a bit of "gross out" factor when it comes to food, etc.

I get a good laugh out of both of them doing silly things that would more than likely get you killed like:

wasting rifle bullets in polar bear country to start a fire when you HAVE MATCHES..(stroud - in the arctic)

Drinking unfiltered/unboiled water when you have a steel canteen cup, fuel to burn, and a fire starting tool.(grylls - practically every episode )

sleeping with seal meat and blubber on his person with polar bears in the area.. (stroud - in the arctic )

climbing everything climbable all the time, and risking falling and breaking every bone in his body at least twice every episode. (grylls )

eating everything caveman style, either raw, or with the charred skin on it, and without having gutted it. (both of them )

jumping into freezing water when there is a perfectly good shoreline to walk on (grylls)

Bear drinking an elephant poop cocktail, and eating rotten zebra meat!! But hey, it got him a guest spot on Oprah.. (Which was the whole idea because publicity = $$$$.)

Having said all that, I also think that many people believe that anything concerning survival should be performed with the grim determination of a military exercise, with nothing even remotely akin to a sense of humor to be displayed at any time whatsoever. And to insert humor or brevity into the sacred skill of bushcraft is practically blasphemy.

Ok, all sarcasm aside, seriously. I think it just "sticks in the craw" of some folks who take the issue of survival seriously that these Action/Adventure shows often glam up the episodes with dashing bits of daring doo that go against even the most basic tenants of wilderness survival. ( keep warm and dry, treat all water if able, stay put and wait for rescue, conserve your energy, etc.) Bad information, tips, etc can get people killed in real world situations. I could go on and on, but I won't

As far as selling products, I say more power to both of them. If bear wants to sell 600 dollar survival knives that are horizontal carry no less bully for him. I hope he makes a mint, really... If Stroud wants to market and sell products, the same goes for him. No reason to "player hate".

I just sincerely hope that no one watches either show and gets hurt trying to imitate them. That would truly be a shame.

I wonder what sorta reaction Steve Irwin's antics got here. I wasn't around then, so I'm not sure if he got it as bad from some of you guys as Bear does.

I think one big difference, is that Steve never (to the best of my knowledge) said here is how to… wrestle a croc, handle a poisonous snake, etc. His, sometimes dangerous (at least to some) actions were to present information on some aspect of the animal’s life not a “how to… “.

Bear’s program is definitely presented as a “how to”. Just watch the Discovery Channel's promotion/promos of the show: WATCH – LEARN- SURVIVE

While this may not be Bear’s position, it is clearly the producers and Discovery Channel position.

Pete

Just to throw more fuel on the fire

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article2116195.ece

You know, nowhere in the show does it say the demonstration is "authentic". I suppose it really doesn't make a whole pile of pintos that he isn't staying on location for the duration all the time. So long as the production renders the intended effect, I wouldn't knock it too much. He is still entertaining to watch, if a bit recalcitrant in his behavior.

Jumping into a mudhole amidst the heather out in the highlands was pretty dramatic, but I think poking a stick in and saying "My, that looks deep" would've been just as informative. His theatrics make me wonder as to his sanity. Given the stagnant nature of those mudholes, I would liken his act to some clod jumping into a cesspool or septic tank, just to demonstrate how deep it is? No, not too bright. His capture, dispatch, and field dressing techniques on rabbit leave something to be desired too. I guess he hasn't heard of tularemia. He commented that his rabbit was a bit gamey as well. No surprise considering how it was cleaned and spitted on a green stick with the bark still on! I don't want to talk about the deer carcass situation, except that it was ridiculously obscene and dangerous.

Maybe if you have the constitution of Hercules you might get away with some of his antics, but I tend to think that an infection or infestation can be just as debilitating as a broken leg. As far as hygiene goes, I conclude Les is far and away superior to Bear from a survival standpoint.