I wonder how you propose to force people to take a small bag of gear when they go into the "woods".

By maps I live in the woods/forest... does that mean every single person stepping out of their home for a walk should have this minimum required bag? There is no imaginary line where if you cross you must have this... and no way to enforce it either.

If you are talking about public parts and entrances then yeah, they could enforce to some degree. Are you going to check to make sure there is 1 kit per car or 1 kit per person? What if the states start to lose $ because they have to turn people away... will they now start selling these kits too?

I think it's a grand idea, and if people had the brains to start they would have their gear anyway... but in the end it's just internet talk

Don't use extreme and rare circumstances to make laws for
ordinary times.

An example presented was the Canadian Police stopping gold-rushers
at the Canadian Border and requiring supplies of at least a ton.
Maybe they should have required even more.

This was an on-going emergency situation of huge proportions.
The gold-rushers numbered in the thousands and no way could they
have lived off the land, even if they had superlative skills.
As it happened, even with those supplies, they killed game and
that put a hardship (starvation) on native people in the area.

Another POV, is that LEOs have way too much power to stop, detain,
harass, search people. This needs to be rolled back not made
easier. All these numerous regulations give LEO's excuses to
to bother people.

Citizen education groups, reaching out to others, through
posted signs, or face to face discussion, is better and
cheaper. Coast Guard Auxiliary used to do this.

"Don't use extreme and rare circumstances to make laws for
ordinary times."

That sums it up pretty darn well.

Even with the # of publicized rescues the statistics are still rather low with how many people go into the woods each year.

Susan

I'm sorry that you thought that my call was stupid but my idea was that if someone needs to have some form of training in order to get a gun licence or drivers licence, then some form of training should be required to get entry to national parks with difficult Terrain.

JohnE's question was not as simple as it appeared at first, and when I thought about it I just ended up with more questions.
I don't even know if a simple or even partial answer exists which was why I just posted it as a discussion topic.

I think everybody posting on this so far had interesting things to say.

I don't think you need to worry about Susan, Cauldronborn.
Don't take it too personal either. She was not calling your idea stupid, just disagreeing with it.
You both have great points.
Forcing people to carry a load of gear is not the complete answer and teaching people how to deal with getting lost or hurt is not a complete answer either because there are some folks who just won't get it. (Susan states it a bit more eloquently than I do.)
I liked the point Todd made about how rare rescue situations are in relation to the number of people out there a lot. It is something we often forget.
I wish I could find numbers for it.

It wasn't meant to be a simple question, glad you got that.

I'd expand on the notion that we shouldn't be making laws based on extraordinary circumstances but I fear that it would turn political, ie, September 11, 2001.

Passing laws is easy, changing the nature of people who want to go into the wild is hard.

Like most things, it comes down to what sort of society we want to live in.

I agree with Todd W
In my country, you can get in your car ( in the city) and drive in any direction ( north, south, east, west ) and find your self in the desert or mountains, well except if when you hit the seashore. Many lives are lost and corpses found when people drive there unprepared. The story comes in the news for a few days and then forgotten. There is no gate that says (This is the beginning of the desert, wear your batman belt and stuffed backpack).

Much as I like that people lives to be saved , there is not much anyone can do about this other than spreading awareness. I wish that in your public parks or in our desert trails authorities put some big posters suggesting minimum requirements for what kind of expected environments. If people won't read or accept those suggestions, then nothing more can be done but wait for corpses to be found.

Just this last week I was in a local forum and one guy showed his camping and cave exploration equipement. It was extensive but with very obvious problem . He focused his attention on equipement that would help him AFTER a disaster takes place like a broken neck . He had an extensive FAK that would address the problem. However, he didnt have a very simple gadget that would tell others about his problem or whereabout (a whistle). I suggested to him that neither he or anyone in his team go down in a cave without having a whistle around his neck. And also suggested him a few cyalume tubes, which he seemed to know nothing about.

This tread is crazy guys.

How big is the problem? This is a survival website with people that like to comment on other people’s misfortune. Maybe the nature of the forum gives the impression the problem is out of control. I am sure only the worst cases are highlighted here and there are many others that are news worthy but are missed by members and others that never make the news. But, maybe this is not a big problem, although I am sure it is a growing one.

It seems the US has so many rules and regulations for people entering parks and forestry service land. I have read on here, in other places and personal experience that people have to apply for permits often costing money and in some cases booking in a year in advance. This is an arcane system that is outdated.

People that are interested in the outdoors should be encouraging other people to enjoy the outdoors. This being a survival forum with some very able and experienced members, it is ideally placed to encourage people to get out and enjoy their environment. But, to do it sensibly and safely, start easy and build up to the more remote locations.

Equipment is NOT always the answer. It is only an aid to survival. Think of the many people that carry survival equipment on planes and especially boats, because they are legislated to. Many think it is a waste of time, an added expense and in some cases, big brother taxing their enjoyment. They have no interest in survival. And, have no interest in educating themselves about survival. Many boat owners for instance, only carry the bare minimum of equipment that the legislation dictates. They often buy the cheapest equipment available and forget about it. They don’t replace out of date items or have equipment serviced. This would be the same if legislation was brought in for wilderness areas. The flood gates would open on cheap wilderness kits that would only meet the requirements of the legislation but not be much use to an individual survivor.

It should be common knowledge on here, that the principle of survival is a pyramid with ‘a positive mental attitude’ or in some quarters ‘a will to survive’ being the solid foundation of the base of the pyramid. Followed by ‘health’, ‘knowledge’ and finely at the very top and taking up the least space is ‘kit’. This can be seen in all of the stories of people that have survived amazing adversity with no knowledge and equipment but with a positive attitude. Also the many stories of the people that have died that had all the best equipment and knowledge but lost faith in themselves.

The way forward for making people aware of the risks is to educate them. To build on excellent campaigns such as a hug a tree campaign (is this still going?) and others that the US have. To highlight that people need to take responsibility for themselves with some simple steps to guide them if something was to go wrong.

If a percentage of the forestry service and parks revenue was put into a nation wide campaign in the media, internet and useful flyers at park entrances, similar to the natural disaster campaigns of many states for hurricanes, tornados, floods and the like; or that of the homeland security campaign. Then the message would slowly get through to many people that are interested in visiting the wilderness; especially those that live in the cities, which vacation in wilderness areas.

Educational campaigns like this are known to work. They don’t get the message across to the whole population but campaigns do get through to a percentage of the population which translate to huge differences on the ground.

But, maybe the authorities feel they have the right balance and don’t need to act.

Forget the 'but gear quality will be poor' argument. Any knife is better than no knife. The numbers of people who get by with cheap equipment is legion. The most used knife a friend's boat is a discount store fillet knife bought twenty years ago. You have to use a steel on it a couple of times a day and it is a fraction of its original size but it still cuts. The quality of knives used by our ancestors was pretty poor and our more distant relatives often made due with slivers of stone, often as small as a fingernail. A $4 compass will still tell direction well enough to prevent you from walking in circles.

There is also no need to have requirements amount to a huge burden. A requirement for boots, compass, knife, and two ways to make fire shouldn't put anyone off.

Requirements can also be objective oriented. Like simply saying they have to have: 'the means to purify water at not less than one gallon per day for each person'. Or: 'Durable and effective, wind and water resistant means of getting out the weather while sleeping'. Objective oriented regulation tells you the outcome but does not describe how to accomplish it.

Don't like equipment requirements? The other effective way is to require a guide. The guide will tell you what to take or provide it, for a price, of course. Don't want to use a guide? Become one. Complete a field and sit-down test, pay your registration fee and go out by yourself all you want.

For a thread that's crazy, it has certainly sparked some interesting comments.

Please carry on.