"David - I am guessing you became the target because you are the most willing to defend your position on the subject."

Regrettably so. ;)


Remind me not to startle Craig. Ever.

My wife and I are going to set out on the Arizona Trail in March and I have gone back and forth on carrying my .22 pistol. I want to, in hopes that I can supplement our food and reduce consumable weight. Anyone know of any thru hikers that have done this?

I think Dean raises a good point with his post that gun ownership/rights etc. and crime rates aren't necessarily related. I'm skeptical of any comparisons whether I agree with them or not because there are so many variables involved besides guns.
Lets suppose for example that we suddenly loosened up all the gun laws in the UK for example. Anyone without a criminal record would be free to buy, own and carry guns at will. I'm sure a few dirt bags would get shot but how many people want to carry a gun around for self defense and how many idiots would all of a sudden decide that murder was a good idea? In the big picture I doubt there would be a statistically significant change in overall crime.
For my counter example suppose friendly aliens landed and magically eliminated ALL the privately owned guns in America. That would make it hard for some 110 pound guy to commit murder but the counter example would be that he could also be more easily victomized by some 240 pound hulk. The quesiont is would the majority of violent people in society all of a sudden become law abiding? Again I doubt it.
I think the problem is a lot bigger and more complicated than guns one way or the other.

Brady, I think your question hits on the really interesting topic here. Can the gathering of indigenous food sources (game, fish, plants) be effectively incorporated into backcountry travel? Other than the odd blueberry or fish diner that one might enjoy, I haven't seen this done to any large degree. Maybe it would simply take too much time, but this was the way that people used to travel. There is a certain primal appeal to this kind of journey, and while I lack the skills and wherewithal to do it, I would love to read about someone who has.

Devin-

How DARE you get this thread back on topic!

Actually, I think the original review thread would be the place for discussing hunting to suppliment food while hiking. This thread was specifically started to discuss the stuff Ryan didn't want clogging up the review.

I think.

Which is sort of why I'm willing to break my normal policy of not getting into these discussions...

But, since you ask, on a much older thread mentioning this rifle I called it "pretty useless." After some thought I stick by that assessment. There are few places (in the US at least) that are still as lousy with game as they were back in the early nineteenth century when people could feed themselves with a rifle during cross-continental treks, so I'm not convinced that any such supplimentation with this little .22 would justify the 16-oz. (Though the thought of a nice roasted grouse after a week on the trail certainly makes me drool.) I certainly wouldn't want to RELY upon it, at least, and bring less food. I'd stand a good chance of starving.

But I may be wrong. There may be places with plentiful enough game. Or perhaps I just suck at hunting.

And my mindset is simply different when I'm out hiking than it was when I was hunting. (I haven't hunted in over a decade.) I'd be more likely to think of taking a photo of that jackrabbit than I would be to think of eating it.

I also don't think it makes sense to carry it "in case" you get lost and run out of food. Don't get lost, or carry a PLB. And if you're an Alaskan bush pilot and need a true survival weapon I think a 12g shotgun is MUCH more utilitarian and multi-purpose, and justifies the weight. You don't need to get within 15 yards to get birds- shoot them on the wing. Squirrels fall like rain. Slugs take deer or elk. And it'll sure keep the bears at bay better than a .22. Etc.

I MIGHT get behind a .410 version a bit more- but it would of course be much heavier.

My $0.02.

EDIT--

I JUST CAN'T WAIT for people to get home from work and jump all over this thread! :o)

Edited by acrosome on 12/04/2009 14:13:59 MST.

Dean, I have a feeling Ryan might be planning something that might try and prove you wrong. (I have no inside knowledge and don't know him, just a hunch.)

But my other point is, even assuming someone couldn't completely rely on bagging extra game for the pot, could we suppose that the ability and the effort undertaken for people with a spiritual connection to hunting might enrich the experience for them, even if they do only harvest minimal game?

That doesn't seem worthless to me. And after all, some would argue that going for long walks is pointless anyway.

"That doesn't seem worthless to me. And after all, some would argue that going for long walks is pointless anyway."

Going for long walks is completely pointless.

That's the point!

John, Douglas, thank you for your sanity and reasoned words... Pleasant in the midst of the fray, as it were...

Oh, and just to add in a bit on separation of church and state... 'cause hey, why stay on topic...

Another early user of the term was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights. In a recorded conversation surrounding the meaning of the 1st Amendment being offered the following was said:

August 15, 1789. Mr. [Peter] Sylvester [of New York] had some doubts...He feared it [the First Amendment] might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether...Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry [of Massachusetts] said it would read better if it was that "no religious doctrine shall be established by law."...Mr. [James] Madison [of Virginia] said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that "Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law."...[T]he State[s]...seemed to entertain an opinion that under the clause of the Constitution...it enabled them [Congress] to make laws of such a nature as might...establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended...Mr. Madison thought if the word "National" was inserted before religion, it would satisfy the minds of honorable gentlemen...He thought if the word "national" was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent.[33]

Madison contended "Because if Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body."[34] Several years later he wrote of "total separation of the church from the state."[35] "Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States," Madison wrote,[36] and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."[

From Wiki...

Edited by 4quietwoods on 12/04/2009 18:16:44 MST.

>How DARE you get this thread back on topic!

My sincere apologies. :)

I have similar perceptions about how plentiful game is. My understanding is that, if anything, fishing is more likely to provide sustenance. I do hope that RJ or someone else with the skills gives this a try. If there are places where it can be done, this would make an interesting read.

Is it just me, or would not the ultimate adventure be leaving for a long walk in true wilderness with a light pack and ZERO weight in consumables? Maybe this would only be possible in a handful of places at a one or two times a year (migration?) but it would be really, really cool.

I have had conversations with a number of subsistence hunters in western Alaska about the feasibility of relying on small – or medium sized – game as a source of food on a long trek. Most of the people I spoke with have a hard time with the idea of walking -- though they are less mocking about kayaking -- over riding a snow machine or four wheeler, but that aside they didn’t think one would be able to make much progress relying on land animals. Birds would work as would seals along the coast, but it takes a lot of time.

A number of years ago I helped train, as sea-kayaking guides, two men from Iqaluit on Baffin Island. We spent a month in and around York Sound in Frobisher Bay, and they were able to supply seal as a primary protein source for much of that time. They were very good hunters; I doubt that I would have been able to survive even if it were legal for me to hunt a seal, which it isn’t in Alaska or Canada. A .22 wouldn’t be my weapon of choice for birds or seals.

"all my feigned righteous and anachronistic upset-ness is currently focused on the troops that are attempting to quarter in my apartment."

My condolences. As you can see, you've missed a great opportunity, and I've missed a few laughs. But don't worry, this will still be going on when you free up. ;}

"i {heart} the bill of rights."

Me, too, and I've been a trifle concerned of late. But let's not go there now. That can wait until it's the dead of winter and everybody's bored out of their skulls.

I just wanted to say that the point of the Pak-Rifle is distinctly not subsistence. It is for mild supplementation and enhancement of experience. As I said in an earlier thread, this little thing only weighs a pound. On longer trips I eat 2 pounds of food a day. So the rifle itself is half of one day's food. If I'm out for 2 weeks, then, and only kill one squirrel, the rifle weight "paid" for itself. In the areas I frequent, you'd almost have to try NOT to find small game. And if you're not focused entirely on mileage, and wanted to explore the land a little more, it'd be a fine thing to actively hunt... just as many backpackers or canoe trippers go fishing when they reach camp in the late afternoon. Incidentally, if I pack one less meal for two weeks, and somehow failed to shoot one small game animal in that time period, I would hardly starve.

"If I...only kill one squirrel, the rifle weight "paid" for itself."

I'd be very impressed if you can get 16oz of meat off one squirrel :)

Edited by dandydan on 12/04/2009 19:01:46 MST.

"I'd be very impressed if you can get 16oz of meat off one squirrel :)"

Well now Dan, we don't have them scrawny squirrels you have up in Canada down here..... ;-)

Only because we feed ours hormones...

Yeah Dan you need to go to Texas where the squirrels are really big.
I always thought of the PAK rifle as a supplement. If you get a rabbit or grouse every days or so thats a lot of extra food over time, if hunting is bad you come home early.
I too am hoping Ryan or someone with more skills (and time) will give this a try and let us all know how it works.

Dean I've enjoyed all your comments in this thread but having grown up in the a part of this country where "A Country Boy Can Survive" is almost considered the National Athem, I know a lot of people who'd disagree that you can't live off the land with nothing more than a good knife, some fishing line, duct tape & a .22. Hell, even having moved up here to the land of Yankees, I still can't go for a walk without wading through goose droppins' or having squirrels constantly barking at me.
And hey, with the current state of the economy it might be in all our best interests to bone up on those "country boy" skills.
I would rather have a .410 for sustenance though. I got my first when I was 14 years old and went out one afternoon and got 8 squirrels. My father had a (good) rule that we ate what we killed, so after having to clean all 8, and eating greasy squirrel for 3 nights straight, I switched to the more challenging .22 and never had the problem of too much meat again.
Devin, I'm an avid fisherman, not so much a hunter these days, but I'm still more likely to be skunked fishing than hunting small game. I suspect that in many parts of the country the real problem with going on that long walk and trying to live off what you take hunting would be the legality of doing so. I'd be very interested to know of established trails where you could hike for a week and legally hunt the entire distance.

Edited by JLeephoto on 12/04/2009 20:07:27 MST.

>> I know a lot of people who'd disagree that you can't live off the land with nothing more than a good knife, some fishing line, duct tape & a .22.

But can you make decent mileage and keep to your schedule while you do it?

And as I said, I just may be a lousy hunter. Or, more likely, since the only regions I've hunted in were western Pennsylvania all of my experiences may have just been in scantily stocked areas.

AND... I am just traditional enough on this issue to prefer my rifles elegantly made, of iron and wood. (I hate ARs, too.)

:o)

Ah, now the crux of the problem, making "good" time and keeping our to the all important schedule :-). I get your point Dean, and truth be known, I prefer hot dogs to rodents anyway. I just find it ironic that we've all become so civilized and domesticated that we've largely forgotten how to feed ourselves. I can't imagine my grandfathers having this same conversation. Of course, when they went in the woods it was precisely to feed themselves.

Oh, good lord, guys... you even expect literal mass in grams on possible food weight gained from hunting? Please... nope, never weighed one. Just eat them. One is plenty for a meal for myself. Consider it the main meal of the day, and I figure it's about half the day's food weight. Whatever. You get the point, I'd hope... :)

How many of you fish? Do you do it mainly for subsistence food, or because you enjoy it and it adds a little to your diet?

Edited by 4quietwoods on 12/05/2009 09:03:06 MST.