As I read through Doug's MARVELOUS 2003 SHOT show coverage and add items to my birthday wishlist, I'm reminded of the person who got me involved in survival as a child.

Across the street from me was a guy that I spent a lot of time with. A very nice man, he was a skilled trapper and hunter, carried tons of guns/binoculars/fishing equipment/knives/etc with him everywhere he went. However, as I got older and started thinking more about survival situations and hearing stories, I thought to myself, "if this guy ever got stranded and had to swim 3 miles, what would happen?"

You see, this guy was about 5'10" and 350 pounds. He had all the equipment and knowledge in the world, and was very "prepared" mentally.

Unfortunately, I think too many of us get caught up in having the neatest gadgets, the coolest tools, and being the most knowledgable in techniques. Perhaps many of us don't take into consideration that PHYSICAL FITNESS is probably THE most important survival skill after using your head. Those PSKs and Super Tools are going to be nothing more than corpse identification tools if you get caught in a situation that you can't handle physically.

Maybe some of you are skilled outdoorsmen, but things aren't as easy to do for you as they were when you were 25 or 30 (or whatever). Being out of shape doesn't mean that you weigh 350 pounds and you can't take a few steps without breathing heavily. Perhaps you haven't swam in a while and couldn't make a 3 mile swim if your life depended on it. Perhaps you couldn't make a 2 mile jog if you had to, or hike up a steep hill/mountain. Perhaps you're too heavy or bulky to climb a tree, or too weak to carry a heavy piece of equipment a few hundred yards to get it to a place where it would be useful. Perhaps we wouldn't be strong enough or quick enough to fight off another human or small predator.

ANYWAY, the point of my story is that while all the fun is in hording up on these neat PSKs and Super Tools and learning Trapping/Survival sklls, I hope that when the time comes most of you are physically fit enough to put them to use effectively, or phsically fit enough to get to a place where you can actually put them to use.

This is my newbie attempt to bring something to the board that I thought was VERY important and also VERY overlooked in the survival "community". I hope at least one person that reads it takes it to heart! Get out and do yourself a favor and give yourself a great chance to survive if you're ever in a situation that requires a ton of physical labor.

You are making a valid statement here. It is very important to keep fit and be prepared physically to face nature’s obstacles. Yet there has to be a moderation in fitness preparation and conditioning. Gyms out there appeal to masses with pictures of O% fat muscle defined bodies. Is this a way? I don’t think so. So what that you can bench press 300 lbs 10 times when I can bench press 150 lbs 50 times. So what that somebody can run 2 miles in 12 minutes but can't walk more that 1 hour at the time? Everything you do is connected. In survival situation you be walking, running, swimming, threading water, climbing, etc, etc… That’s the activities you should focus upon. Walk a lot… Bike… Get in shape with activities that you can use. But also you can be the fittest person on the planet yet without knowledge how to do something you wouldn't get very far. I think that survival is a combination of physical fitness, stamina, mental toughness and knowledge how to do/use/prepare things.

Matt

Very great points. I don't think simply being a Gold's Gym workout warrior is very important, and I wasn't trying to convey that message in my post.

I will say that I think in most EVERY survival situation, some degree of physical fitness is going to be required. I will also say that, except for a few examples, a fit, strong, well-prepared body can overcome a complete lack of tools or equipment (although it might not be as easy or fun) in one way or another.

The point is, as you mentioned, that it all goes hand-in-hand. Where it stacks on the priority list exactly is debatable, but I don't think it's debatable that it should be up there pretty high.

I read on one survival school website (I think it was the BOSS website) that they often had superfit athletes try their survival program and drop out, while 'less perfect' individuals persevered and prospered. They suggested that "superfit" students were used to eating like pro athletes, and simply couldn't handle being reduced to survival rations (sometimes less than a third of their normal caloric intake).

Must remember that "fit" means "well adapted for the environment", not necessarily "I can outrun a cheetah and bench-press an elephant" <img src="images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Maybe we shouldn't confuse being fit with being on the cover of "BIG ARMS R US" or the "Sports Illustrated" swimsuit issue. If we were to define "fit" as having a body that can properly function under stress then I would argue that a person of normal proportion with a little body fat would be more fit than an underwear model in a survival situation, assuming that they were active. They say that an average person from the industrial countries carries around about three weeks of food on him. I don't know about you guys, but I may be carring around a fourth. The model will be colder than me and have less fuel to work on. I think that it would be a bad idea to avoid the gym. Strength is a great ally whether you are walking out of the Frank Church, or putting up a lamp in your kitchen.

I believe the quote from BOSS that was mentioned refered to having marathon runners and tri-athaletes who trained for the course on 5000 calorie diets, fall apart when the tried to function on 1500 or fewer calories.

I look at all the old farts (like fought in WWII, old) that I know. The ones that are still moving around are the ones that were putting up fence in their 80's. They all have bellies, but damn they're fit.
Just my end of the day rant,
Biscuits

You've pretty much made the point I was hoping to see made, but I would like to add a little more.

Don't forget the whole evolutionary importance of fat. Fat is your body's way of storing energy up for "famine" during periods of "feast". You naturally get stronger (yes stamina is different) as you plump up... just think about the fact that the 350 lb guy leg presses 350 lbs every time he stands up! Fat is also an insulator, the way it should work is you build up fat during the summer and fall when food is abundant, then use that fat to stay warm and as a food supplement during the winter months. Also, as you loose the weight, your stamina increases because you have all this physical strength on a much lighter frame... remember all those commercials where people talk about how their "energy level" has gone up after loosing weight. You bet it has, that's so you can get out there on the Serengeti plains and run down that gazelle in the spring before all your energy stores are depleted!

Our problem is that industrialization has made every month a "feast" month and famine doesn't exist! So we put on the fat and never work if off... which then leads to medical problems down the road.

So here's my point, some fat is not necessarily bad... especially in most survival scenarios where food is going to be scarce. Don't mistake the madison avenue ideal of being a walking bag of bones with actually being healthy. Oh yeah, and the weightlifters, that's just an example of a different extreme. What's the point in having great physical strength when that isn't required for your everyday needs, like stalking a gazelle? Muscles require energy... you'll have to consume many more calories just to maintain that, and what is the benefit in a survival situation? Is our weightlifter friend gonna go wrestle a grizzly or what?

None of this is to justify being overweight and out of shape, but do understand why things work the way they do from the evolutionary (and by definition, survival) aspect. Balance is the key, not too fat and not too thin. And yes, we probably do focus on gadgets too much, what makes man successful is his ability to think and adapt. Understand why/how things work the way they do (and that includes your body), and you'll be able to deal with the bad times when they do come. The tools will always be ancillaries to THAT!

Great thread start! I like things to be quantifiable and measurable so that they become attainable. So... How about some bench-marks

Basic capabilities:

Climbing - trees and rocks
Swiming
Walking
Running
Lifting
Carrying
Fighting

Basic Strength bench marks

Strong enough to lift self with arms atleast 10 times (this should cover climbing) - chin-ups and push-ups

Strong enough to lift and carry whatever you consider a 3 day BOB for 3 days on the move quickly

Ability to run 5 miles

Ability to swim 3 miles

Ability to hold off proportional attacks in hand-2-hand combat. This isn't the 90# lightweight fighting the 250# line-backer but the 90#'er against similarly fit 90#'er. Other fight situations need to be met with tools such as stealth, chemicals, edged weapons or firearms (probably in that order).

This is not a very high mark but it will be a decent start on bing fit enough to handle most situations.

If you are already severly obese or have cardiac or pulmonary situations that make this set of goals un-attainable then you need to correct them as far as possible and accept the need for some serious amount of gear - O2 tanks, batteries for your'e pacemaker and the surgeon needed to replace them etc...

You just disqualified 3/4 of males living in NYC, half NYPD and 10% of US Armed Forces. Right on and I like your standards. <img src="images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Matt

MiniMe,

I like this approach to responding to a threat from a bigger individual, but perhaps we should eliminate edged weapons from the list.

As I understand it, and I am by no means an expert, fighting effectively with knives requires a great deal of skill. Add to that the necessary close range of blades and the situation could very quickly turn downhill.

I suppose including machetes, tomahawks, hatchets, etc. in the edged weapon category could eliminate some of the disadvantages, but even still....

Just my $.02.

~Wesley

I'm not a weight lifter, and I do see (somewhat) the point you were trying to make. However, "survival" may rely on deterrance to some extent, and in that case, the weight lifter has the advantage. Less likely to get attacked or even need to use the muscle.