Why do you guys ride on Bear so much?

Reading recent responses about Man vs Wild show got me thinking: why do you guys ride so much on Bear? I mean I watch the show every now and than and I be the first one to admit that sometimes he does things the harder way but so what? He doesn’t do stuff our way, he doesn’t hole up and waits for the rescue but is proactive and searches for the way out. Yes, he takes unnecessary risk but he puts his skin on the line. I think that he shows you worst case scenario by going an extra mile to do things more difficult way. Well it would be nice to walk over the glacier but let me show you what would happen if you walk underneath. Stuff he eats would not be my choice to eat but hey if a guy wants to show me that huge worms can be digested than go for it. Why do you care how he holds a knife or what brand of blades does he use? So what that he destroys the knife every show? If destroying a knife gets me out of a jam than so be it. Maybe his $50 Gerber is hurting your eyes because you were under the impression that $400 Sebenza guarantees you a survival success? My skin is worth more than any blade out there. He is probably already being forced to wear certain gear and use certain equipment by TV producers since lately every damn program is one big commercial. He is more athletic, fit and with mindset that few of us can match. He also did a lot of extraordinary things in his life and personally for me even thou I respect his military experience what convinced me that he can hold his own is his Everest climb.

He doesn’t carry ton of gear on him and makes survival look easy. Also survival style that is being very popular here on this forum is passive and equipment oriented. Generators, piles of food, equipment and gear take priority over skills but than again skills that Bear has may not be a priority in urban survival. I would like you to do a 5 day hike thru a jungle or mountains or desert with your BOB. Somehow we cover the lack of skills by redundancy in certain items (ex: 5 different fire starting devices). Also with this board conservative approach to survival are we being too harsh in judging his style? When was the last time you were in the place where nearest human being is 5 days walk away? Also some people are not gear oriented. You guys should have seen the disappointment on faces of Doxa watches fans when Matthew McCoungey (sp) told them than he doesn’t care what timepiece he wore portraying Dirk Pitt in the movie Sahara and to add insult to an injury he wore it upside down thru the flick. I think same thing happened with Anderson and McGuyver and Swiss Army knives. Bear has a typical stranded ill prepared hiker approach to his “adventures”. If everyone was as prepared as us, watching survival shows wouldn’t be fun.

He is willing to make a clown out of himself on TV but than again you go out there, do some of his stunts with a smile while talking to audience and maintaining posture. If I was doing a survival show my commentary would be a one long beep. Bear has a successful show and is now in the entertainment business. He wants to make a buck and if he does it thru selling custom knives than be it. I know few people who did the same and somehow we don’t ride on them for it. And quite honestly I would rather have Bear on my side than some of those other guys. There are very few people out there who can put their survival skills into decent income job. He did the best he could so give him a break. I’m just surprised that Breitling watches are not picking him up as a spokesman for their emergency model. I don't worship a man but can recognize a man who is confident and agressive whcih in the end means that he will not fold under pressure.

I totally agree that Bear gets a bad rap. I think he's pretty entertaining, & seems to know what he's doing. It's easy to sit at a computer and second guess the guy; I'd like to see them try to survive with just a knife & canteen. Sure lots of us (me included) wouldn't do half the stuff he does e.g.: eating rotting zebra flesh, eating a live fish...amongst other things. But hey, if I could do those things & get paid for it, I’d do them too.

I think some of your points are valid. Bear would most likely fair well under any survival condition.

That said here are a few views on your thoughts.

Climbing Everest is no big feat especially if you climb the western Cwm which is now simply a pay your way up for most who attempt it. In the world of alpinism Everest is not considered to be that impressive. No I have not climbed Everest but if I had the money I could climb it too.

I have not seen anything about Bear's seeeing any action while in the SAS. I have heard that there is a division of the SAS that is for the aristocrats and not as tough as the other SAS groups; this is just hearsay.

I view Bear the same way I view any other TV show; just TV world not real world.

Bear feigns being alone but obviously has a camera crew.

Bear is reckless. Period.

Bear definitely wore a PFD in one episode.

Bear then goes and puts his name on a $700 knife that is average at best and way over priced.


Yes I agree that Bear still has the skills and experience but his show is a bit silly IMO.

I do like his minimalism though; I may be flamed for saying this here at ETS but I think many of us carry too much gear even for short walks in the woods. I love the feeling of having just the very basics and needing to use experience and creativity to get along in the woods.

I actually think there is a lot to learn from Bear. He normally prefaces his more risky actions by saying you don't want to do this, but if you must, here is a good way to do it. It may cause some to take unnecessary risks, but I think it is a good way to show people like myself how to overcome a bad situation, that I would never willingly put myself into. Also in the first series, he seemed to be drawing on his survival/evasion skills, which would be different than the survival skills practiced by members of this forum.

In the newer series, the associated camera crew is obvious, as he often speaks directly to them. I think the newer series is more "honest," no floating down a river what I think was a hidden life vest, and I think the series is trying to teach more survival skills as we know them.

Again, I would not take the chances he takes willingly, but he is trying to use those "chances" to teach. (What I like most and keep seeming to miss are his shelter building scenes. That is where I learn most.)

Spud

The problem with this TV show is that it is being aired to those folks who don't know any better. If the show Man v Wild is regarded as a source of good survival technique then it fails on some very important fundamental points. Those that don't know any better may follow this guys survival technique philosophy, which is mostly being of quick but highly dangerous methods of self extraction from a life threatening event, to the point where these methods are even more dangerous than the initial survival event itself. There are so many examples of this type of dangerous nonsense in this TV program. This is Hollywood fantasy survival caricature for those folks who have never been outside suburban living. It is popular simply because it excites these folks deeply held fears and fantasies of finding themselves stranded in the wilderness desperate to get back to suburbia to exclaim that they too can survive where others would have failed. Bear takes them along on this vicarious journey of survival thrills (hence the eating of raw zebra etc). For these folks to do the same in reality and follow Bears methods would be fatal. Survival is mostly about making good well thought out common sense decisions . As most suburban folks can't navigate to save themselves they are better staying put, hopefully to be found by SAR. If Bear showed the audience a map and compass and explained how these survival items worked to enable a much safer self extraction the show would suddenly become a mundane outdoor trekking show. Here lies the problem. Good survival instruction versus vicarious thrills. Vicarious thrills seem to always win out. We know the difference, others do not and their lives may well depend on knowing that difference if they ever left the city.

I have exactly the same feeling about this show. Dangerous nonsense.

Points well taken Polak. I've said many times in this and other forums I like Bear and would probably like to hang with him, BUT... I've also said I see his show almost as a sitcom. That's harsh, I know, and certainly not true, but unlike Les Stroud's show, Bear is more of a clown.

I really don;t think he put's himself "on the line". He has a camera crew and who knows whom else there to aid, comfort, and if necessary, rescue him. He does take unecessary risks.

I don;t worry about someone else repeating his mistakes (I've said that many times and will again). We're ultimately responsible for what we do and one can no more blame Bear for teaching dangerous stuff than blame the high-flying motorcycle jumpers for the same thing.

I watch every episode of Man-v-Wild that I can.....for the entertainment. If Bear were here, I assure I would be much more diplomatic just out of everyday friendly politeness. He seems like a pretty good guy.

Good points though....

I don't have the opportunity to watch Man vs Wild on TV, but I did watch some excerpts on youtube after the thread on the $700 knife. I think it's pretty obvious that this is mock survival, and think people in general including city dwellers can make the difference between theater and real life, just like everybody knows that professional wrestling is fake and mock combat yet we still go see it because it's fun and you can still learn some tricks out of it.

Pro wrestling is fake?

I watch every episode of man vs. wild I can get, but that being said I watch every survivorman episode and episode of Ray Mears I can find also. It's not that I hate on Bear, but it's just if the things Bear does are so hard, how does a carmera crew manage? In this last episode, he was talking about how cold the water was, and how fast he had to get to the hot springs, but whoever was holding the camera filming him trying to get out of the water was just standing there in this cold water that Bear could barely get out of. Things can't be as dangerous as he says, or else they'd be having funerals for cameramen after evey episode. It seems to me that the more amazing people are the cameraguys and the soundmen, cause they do what Bear does, while still carrying around a lot of equipment and looking through viewfinders. So perhaps things aren't as dire as he says, and they are just playing it up for TV, in which case fine, they can do that if they want, but I wish they'd just skip it and be honest with theirselves. Something like "The camera crew is going to walk around the stream, but if you did need to cross it, here's how to climb across on a tree.", would go a long way towards making me respect the show. It also bothers me that while he does all those crazy things to show you waht to do if you are in the situation, why doesn't he show what to do if you don't have a flint or a water bottle. If you are prepared enough to have a knife, flint, and watter bottle, you aren't likey to get yourself stuck in the things he gets stuck in. To his credit, on his page on the discovery channel website, Bear admits that he did use a PFD, but that the insurance company made him, and he wouldn't do it again. I do appreciate all the different wilderness regions they shoot in. They get some amazing film...

In the end, I'm glad that all these shows are available, but if I was stuck out in the woods, I'd rather have ray mears around, instead of Bear. Unless of course I was surrounded by a angry mob of Pro-Wrestlers...

He picks the hard way to do everything. Not the smart way. He takes stupid risks that aren't needed.

Also, a lot of his stuff has got to be staged. Like a life jacket under his coat when he taunts a bear, jumps off a cliff into a river he doesn't "know" the depth of, and leaves his crew behind- odds are, if there was a bear, it was a trained one, he probably knew that the depth of the river, and couldn't be bothered to be man enough to admit this was stupid and instead hid his float gear. Or the "wild horse" that let him get on it and was wearing the shoes? And those are just the two episodes I watched- I've heard about the boat. Sure, he conveniently finds a leaky boat and one that doesn't for the crew. And the rotting zebra, and the infamous elephant poo. The comparison to wrassling is a good one. Yes, it's real. As real as the scripts and props and hidden safety measures allow.

I had some concerns about Les when he started. But I honestly started to think of the camera gear as a young child he has take care of to- it has to be warm, most of it has to be dry, it has to be carried most of the time (60 pounds, good spawnling simulator), and not everything goes according to plan- it probably flusters him a little. What he shows is pretty real world, to. Eating a rotting caribou is not something we're likely to see, becuase if you are out for a week, in most climates your risks are a LOT higher than the gains. I'd love to see Bear do the same- no crew, no helicopter on standby, no scouting of good locations- and play stupid games like he does.

No, Bear is at best a stunt man and at worst a con artist (there are some questions as to his service record, and some of his adventures). I hate to agree with bentirran like this, but caricature is a good word to describe MvW as any I can think of.

And then there is the deal of the $700 dollar knife. It still looks like a hunk of cheap junk to me, even if it is from a smith with a good rep who charges about half that for the same thing without doofus' signature on it. That's just being insulting, no living person's signature magically makes a blade that much better.

I personally find the show entertaining and watch to try and glean some tidbit of information that I can use for myself. But I do recognize the show to be entertainment. I think people react the way they do and talk about him the way they do because the stuff he does is not something most anyone would do. It makes for great watercooler conversation.

Personally, I respect Bear's abilities and knowledge as I respect everyone else's. I just find some of the things that he does to be so alien and unthinkable, that it makes for something to talk about. Like the elephant poo drink. Or climbing up and down a waterfall against the water. I think the show is staged, as it probably wouldn't be reasonable or safe to film otherwise.

But I guess in show business, any news is good news since it gets people to watch. I bet there are lots of people who watch just to see if he ever goes splat. Not to be mean, but I thought the episode where he drank untreated jungle water and got sick to be funny. But I did like his shelter.

Well Bear sang a good rendition of 'the bare necessities' on british tv one time so can't be all bad.
But as you say it's all staged. Whenever he 'parachutes' into trees or slides down a glacier, there is always a camera crew at the exact spot he comes to land.
That doesn't affect whether the advice is good though.

And you notice survivormans 'knife' is a multitool? And seems to work for everything.
simon

I agree with Bentirran. The risks Bear takes are unnecessary (such as running down a steep slope of loose scree), the advice he gives out is questionable (e.g., it's safe to drink unfiltered, unboiled water because there are critters swimming in it). The public is taken for a ride on the shock value of the program, not the educational value.

Still, it is the show you love to hate, isn't it?

Frank2135

I guess it is all about context, isn't it. The thing is we are conscientious about what is put out there in the media. We compare Bear to guys like Doug and Les, who would not ever advocate much of what Bear purports, not because it is right or wrong, but simply inappropriate for the layman. There is some redemption in Bear's wild demonstrations, that being the notion of inspiring people to step up to the challenge at least and try to survive. "What one man can do, another can do" was the mantra of Anthony Hopkins in "The Edge", and I have no doubt no one in the survival business is going to recommend fighting a bear with sticks, but the notion that you do what you gotta is in that message somewhere. That Bear is able to do what he does, staged or otherwise, can have some meaning in inspiring otherwise intelligent folks to think for themselves, to at least try and do something within reason, or maybe even take a risk, bearing in mind their known limitations and that all men are not equal to the task at hand.

Bear's actions on the show would be foolhardy for most folks put into survival situations. He demonstrates extreme actions, which can be construed to exemplify that more is perhaps possible than first appears, if we are willing to think a bit and perhaps prepare ourselves for when the time would come. If you have to kill the bear, then it is good to know it can be done, and with less than you would ideally like to have to git 'er done with. That doesn't mean putting yourself deliberately into that situation. It means 'Never give up, never surrender". It means not believing in the "No win scenario", gees can I come up with any more theatrical cliches for ya.

Should Bear and his buddies make a buck or two by striking while the iron is hot? Hey, I won't knock the guy for marketing himself. If people weren't willing to pay, then that'd be that. I wouldn't confuse making a living with bad endorsements. His knife will get the job done just as much as any other. If people want to pay the $700 for it, that's their deal, and you really can't hold it against him, or you would have to condemn the whole danged lot, including Doug.

So yes, if you wanna compare him to some public service standard, then he will come up short, and is criticizable on many counts. I don't think that is the context of his production, so I take it for what it is and don't hold it against him too much if he seems to be excessive most of the time. Les Stroud he ain't, and I don't think his objectives are similar. Is he entertaining? Yeah, that's seems pretty obvious, so just take it for what it is, and realize that what he's selling is just food for thought, and not necessarily universal altruisms.

"I think it's pretty obvious that this is mock survival, and think people in general including city dwellers can make the difference between theater and real life..."

Actually, that's not true. If you're old enough to remember a TV show called "Marcus Welby, M.D.", you'll remember that it was totally fiction, not meant to be any kind of documentary, and the star was a well known actor. Yet he received thousands upon thousands of letters from people who wanted advice on their physical and medical problems. And there are many more who think what they read in the National Inquirer and the other rags is accurate information.

No, a lot of people raised on television seem to think that whatever they see there is true and accurate.

Movie writers and directors don't bother to research much of anything you see. Some of it is so stupid that its painful to watch.

I don't know about the rest of the world, but way too many Americans are stupid beyond belief. I'm waiting to hear of someone suing Bear's show/production company because someone followed his antics and died.

Sue

Susan:

Ha, Ha, Ha !!!

Wish I had said that.

If people are stupid enough to hurt or kill themselves trying to emulate what that see on television, who's dumber, the one giving the advice or the one following it?

I've watched a few episodes of Man vs Wild, although I think Bear is somewhat of a loose nut, it's entertaining. I also don't understand why there's the criticism of the show, just take it for what it is. If you don't like it, don't watch it and it will go away. No, it doesn't teach you anything remotely useful, but it's not supposed to be a educational showand they make no claims as such. It's purely for entertainment and ratings value only. It seems that some people just don't understand the difference. TV is not real life, and most of the time has no resemblence to real life. If it did, who would want to watch it? Watching ER won't make you into a doctor, or The apprentice won't turn you into a Donald Trump, Man vs. Wild isn't going to make you into a uber-survivalist. If you think that Man vs. Wild should have more realism, why aren't people also saying the same thing about Survivor? Just the name should lead you to believe that it should have something to do with survival, but it doesn't, and nobody seems to care.

As for his knife, if he can sell it at that price, I'm all for him. That's capitalism at it's finest. Nobody's forcing people to buy one, they're not misleading anyone or lying about it, he's just trying to capitalize on his 15 minutes of fame. There are a lot of people that spend a lot more than that on other knives and toys without a second thought, value is all relative.

I like Survivorman a lot more than MvW, but again, it's still a television show. I'm don't watch it thinking I'm going to able to do anything that Les does, I still consider it just a TV show. Maybe a higher class or entertainment, but still entertainment.

I know I have commented on Bear’s show before and thought I could bite my tongue and stay out of this discussion, but my tongue was beginning to bleed too much, so here goes.

I am not as concerned about the supposed adults out there who are unable to distinguish thoughtful, useful survival skills and techniques from those which pose great risk (such as climbing up a waterfall or running down a steep spree or jumping into a river of unknown depth), but I am real concerned about the kids and teens who may seek to emulate Bear.

We have had a number of younger individuals inquire about survival skills/techniques, as they wish to “try it on their own” for a while. Hopefully, we have given good advice and they will heed our warnings and suggestions, but I imagine for every one that comes here for advice, there are likely dozens out there, that will view Bear’s show and attempt to emulate his actions.

I have said it before, a show like his, especially shown on the station on which it appears and in the portrayed format (authoritative action documentary) in which it is filmed, there is an obligation to hold it to a higher standard then a show like “Survivor”.

While it is fine to view Bear’s show as good entertainment as opposed to a serious or informative show on survival and yes, he may have valuable advise as times, including the very positive “can do” attitude, my feeling is the general public (especially kids) may not be able to distinguish the subtleties, which will eventually lead to someone’s serious injury or death.

Please keep in mind; it may not only be the individual who is attempting to emulate Bear, that is seriously injured or killed, but a rescuer who responds to the call.

Just my 2 cents, for what it is worth.

Pete

I happen to be hooked on MvW and find it extremely entertaining and even somewhat educational.

I like Bear, although I have always considered him a bit of a nut for the insane chances he takes on the show. But that's the show - worst-case scenarios and most desperate measures.

Comparing Bear to Les is appropriate, but those who consider Les to be less of a nutjob just because he doesn't take some of the flashy chances that Les takes forget the basic point - Les intentionally strands himself in hostile country, completely alone, with minimal kit and 60 pounds of freakin' camera equipment. And of course, there there have been times when Les has climbed down a dangerous rock or ice face, set up a camera, then climbed back up and back down again just to get the video footage.

You can also criticize Bear for walking himself out, in direct violation of the prevailing "stay put" wisdom on ETS, but don't forget that Les does the same thing.

Bear may have staged some of his close calls, but if you watch camera positions and behavior carefully you may find that Les stages a whole lotta stuff as well; he just does it with more sublety than Bear.

Frankly, I think they're both equally nuts, equally entertaining, and equally melodramatic about their situations. I enjoy watching both shows, I pick up a few useful tidbits of info from both, and I'm smart enough to know that what they are both showing are survival techniques that are beyond the skill level of most ordinary people, including me.

I don't think you should blame either one of them for the idiots who might try to emulate them, any more than you should blame Jackie Chan or the Governator for idiots who may try to emulate the semi-super-human feats they accomplish in their movies.

I feel the same way... well said.

I agree with WillCAD, despite his Mickey ears.

I agree. There's no sense (to me) in thinking the Bear is going to teach someone something that'll then get them killed. He runs down steep inclines at great risk of bodily injury....if someone else does that "because Bear did it", then that's life. What would be next....lobbying for Government intervention.... a warning before each show? "The Surgeon General has determined........"

It isn't that "we" know better so "we" don;t have to worry about emulating some of the things he does. "They" should know better, and if they don;t, it isn't Bear's job to make sure they do. His job is to keep us smiling, whinning, and complaining about the stuff he does. I think I've reached the conclusion that the show's producers know what's being said about the Bear's antics...so they keep doing it because his ratings are good.

I think that is a part of it- we know better, and we would never, ever in good faith suggest to anyone that they try some of his silliness.

I'm not going to say someone like the Jackass crew shouldn't be on the air becuase they do stupid, dangerous stunts. But I am going to call them tasteless idiots. At least they say that their stunts are dangerous, they have a nice big warning. (And if MvW doesn't have disclaimer on it, I'd be shocked. But it is probably teeny tiny little print that flashes quickly, becuase I don't remember it.)

If I could turn this hobby into a living, I would probably try to, but realistically I can't. As an professional geek, I see sloppy, badly written programs, inefficent hardware, and things that are just junk. I know I wouldn't admit to helping design a lot of the tech products on the market today. I have little respect for the designers of this equipment becuase making something good isn't much harder or more expensive. I get frustrated with them because they make conscious decision NOT to follow anything that comes close to what I could consider good practices nor do I think they take pride in what they do.

Bear styles himself as a survival professional, but instead he's showing something that isn't much higher than Survival Jackass. What I've seen of him, he goes out of his way to do things that hardest and most risky way possible, and he doesn't say "this is not how you should do this, you should do XYZ, but I'm going to do it the stupid way anyway". These are not best practices, this is not dealing with your customer in good faith, these are worst practices. Maybe he has little enough self worth that putting out a sideshow, and signing his name on it, is something he can live with. In which case, I could feel sorry for him. But he relishes it, he knows he has a cash cow and he's going to milk it hard and to ghenna with everything else. So instead, I'm embarrassed by him, as he is a public face to modern survival in popular culture.

Well, I personally would like to see the Bear on Iron Chef America, facing a Mario Batali or a Cat Cora. I bet they couldn;t top raw Zebra served without knife and fork!

Those aren't my Mickey ears, I'm just, uh, holding them for a friend. Yeah, that's the ticket, I'm holding them for a friend... Morgan Fairchild!



I see it slightly different; I see Bear not doing things the "stupid way" but intentionally doing things the hard way to show the worst-case scenario and its solution.

Les is less obvious about it, but let's face it, he intentionally makes things WAY harder on himself, too - what kind of person goes into the wilderness on a day hike with no knife, but carrying 60lbs of camera gear, then refuses to ditch the camera gear when it becomes obvious that it's a major liability to his survival? A person who's putting on a show, that who.

I see both of them as showmen, putting on very entertaining performances that really are at least a little educational. And hey - the scenery they've both shown us is nothing short of the most spectacular on Earth, right?

They're not really trying to teach us, they're trying to entertain us; they're the Evil Kenevils of Survival, jumping crocs and sharks instead of busses.

the truth is that you move slowly in a real survival situation -- cautious and slow. TV on the other hand needs speed and drama. Bear is not teaching survival, he is making tv.

I saw bear on some talk show a little while ago, he actually seems to be a likeable guy. At the very least I don't think he's stupid or has a death wish. Also, I can't imagine him promoting himself as a survival "professional", but he's just another actor in a TV show, and he's doing what actors do, and that's generate ratings. I still wouldn't follow any of his "survival" advice.

Maybe they should include warnings at the beginning of every show, for the kids, but ultimately it's not his responsibility to control what kids watch, especially since he's not on public television.

You're point about the 60 pounds of camera gear with Les is part of why I was hesitant at first, but it does a pretty good job of simulating a little kid or a hurt companion with you. But he's not someone who does stupid stuff. He makes mistakes, and he cusses at himself for it, that's human. He gets careless when he's tired, just like we all would. And If you'd read Les' comments on his website, if it gets bad, he's dropping the camera gear, lighting up his PLB, and hoping he'll get extracted. He's got a good simulation going.

If Bear breaks his leg doing something stupid like climbing up a waterfall or jumping off a 40 foot cliff into rapids, he's got a camera crew within a hundred feet of him, including a medical staff, and a helicopter on standby. That isn't a simulation, that is a side show. Toss in questions about his credentials and his habit of pointing his daddy's lawyer at the people who raise them (like the people who were on the safety boat when "soloed" some trip in a kayak). He has a credability gap that Kenevils wouldn't jump.

Hey, I am always entertaining, just usually it is only myself.

Bear reminds me of another young Scotsman I know who is often reckless just to show that it can be done, and for the thrill of the experience. People with a survival mentality will only jump out of a perfectly good aircraft in order to learn how to do it right. Bear is just too reckless to be a leader. He'd push you alright, right off the cliff! There's something wrong with that boy.

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.

Allright, now someone's gone and done it. The old "Don;t try this at home" preface to each episode. This is truly funny....truly it is.

Here I am at home....wanting to RUN down a mountain; just starving to eat a raw Zebra with my teef; dying to drink some Amazonian creek water straight from Mother Amazon herself; and on and on. But I can't!!! Why not? Because Les and the Bear told me not to!!! They specifically ordered me "not to try this at home"!!! So here I am....at home.....bored and frustrated.... because I cannot do in my own home what they do in the wilderness.

And what if I managed to create a wilderness in my living room, and run down a mountain while trying to catch a "wild" horse, and I hurt myself? What would happen to me? Why, Les and the Bear would be angry at me for not following their orders, that's what!

Before Hollywood's sex scenes they should warn people "not to try this at home". Perhaps we could make it Federal law.

I don;t get this reasoning at all. Help me.