Bushcraft - lets pretend or the real thing?

[Grooveski]

We were just drifting past, having a break, heading round the corner. That wood(like so many others) stops........

 

[Nat]

Names, labels, ideas, hobbies.

Just names. Its what you do, how you do it, and how it makes you feel that matters. Whether it be in the Oz outback, or a small copse of woods 3 miles from the M25.
You're being as self sufficient as you can be.

 

[basha]

Greetings from one MOS to another!
The ‘bushcrafty’ types in these British Islands may be doing their best to get back to nature in an increasingly restricted environment. However they love this land no doubt, over and above all the politics and cr*p we have to endure living here in these crowded islands. There are still plenty of places that are effectively wildeness, Scotland has been mentioned as one of them. Just how much space do you really need to be truly alone? Take these ‘players’ and put them in another country such as Oz and I’d think their playing lessons will pay off.
I could turn things around and ask why so many of resident Australians don’t take advantage of their beautiful wilderness when they have so much of it, but instead lock themselves in their conurbations and hum-drum existences, just like the majority of human kind? Each to their own. We are doing our best.

 

[stephendedwards]

Let me be very clear there was never any criticism of any of you implied in anything I said. I guess the disparity between the myth and reality kicked in and with the long dark approaching I frequently become darkly philosophical

Steve
:You_Rock_

 

[basha]

Let me be very clear there was never any criticism of any of you implied in anything I said. I guess the disparity between the myth and reality kicked in and with the long dark approaching I frequently become darkly philosophical

Steve
:You_Rock_

None taken! The approaching 'long dark' is enough to make any one darkly philosophical.

 

[Porcupine]

yes, its pretend.

to me it is a form of "playing" that has a lot of positive bonusses though.

i learn a lot about a lot of things,
the names of plants and animals,
the ways they can be dangerous or usefull.
what to do and what not to do in certain situations,
it gives me the chance to meet and learn from a lot of people.
to see what other people make and have a try at some things now and then


by being interested in bushcraft i learned the skills i needed to help save a life at a workaccident.

yes, its make believe and all.but i do think the world would be safer and better if more people would dream every now and then.

 

[swagman]

Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

You can do that sort of thing in parts of Scotland, but if you walk for more than a week in any one direction you'll run out of bush.

But anyway, as long as you're making a choice about it, it's just playing. The game might get you killed, but it's still a game.

There's nothing wrong with playing in my book.

Funnily enough, in my experience Australia (Tasmania specifically) has far more restrictions on what's considered acceptable than we do in Scotland.

Anyway, firestorm breaking in 3, 2, 1....

:BlueTeamE

Gregorach

What restrictions are they?

70 persent of the place is wilderness how is anyone gona find you to restrict you?.

 

[Aragorn]

the weekends we have together may be pretend bushcraft, but the hangover the next day is real enough

 

[Robby]

You could say that the aborigines are just playing, not taking their place in a great civilisation that protects their wilderness for them.


If it had been left to the aboriginies the wilderness wouldn't have needed protecting. It's the great civilisation that threatening it, but that's another issue altogether.

There are still some wilderness areas in Scotland, especially in the northeast. Where the confusion comes in I think is that people confuse our freedom to roam policy with a freedom to do as you please. We don't have a specific trespass law but a landowner still has a say on whether you can turn up and pitch camp in his back yard. Courtesy costs nothing and can get you a long way.

I don't have aproblem calling it playing. I like the idea of being able to play at bushcraft/wildcamping/enter-preferred-term. I don't know if I would be quite as happy living it long term, but I like the idea of knowing how to. I do like the idea that it connects us to skills our ancestors used, but I'm prejusiced because I'm into archaeology. I can look at something someone theorises and say "i can do that"

All in all, Play, be happy, and do what you enjoy.

 

[Tengu]

But the aboriginies never seem to have done much of any use. (except explore the more interesting plants and animals possibly due to the extinction of the megafauna, which may have been due to them, though more likley to climate change)

(do you think megafauna to be a stupid term?, its like BR saying `duorail`...)

They are not like people like the polynesians, who traveled the oceans, or the inuit, who traveled the arctic (and why is a long story in itself)

Or come to think of it, the basques who are not primitive but have the honour of being `always been there` and so are more indigent than a great many so called aboriginals

or, the mongolians who have a great civilisation but are not settled yet (and I doubt they ever will)

what would a land be without people?

 

[gregorach]

Gregorach

What restrictions are they?

70 persent of the place is wilderness how is anyone gona find you to restrict you?.

Well, sure, you can get away with all sorts of things - but they're not considered acceptable. With the exception of the south-east, most of Tassie's best wilderness is National Park, and they take a very dim view of wild camping and the lighting of fires. Now, sure, you can do it anyway and hope you don't get caught, but I'm not really that sort. And that big, unrestricted forest in the south-east is proper untravelled wilderness. Very difficult to get into, no tracks, and you're typically going to make less than 5km a day.

I might've found things different if I'd had access to independent transport. But they're very big on the whole "leave no trace" business...

 

[gregorach]

But the aboriginies never seem to have done much of any use.

Sorry Tengu, but who gave you the right to decide whether an entire group of diverse cultures have "done much of any use"? Life is its own use.

 

[swagman]

Well, sure, you can get away with all sorts of things - but they're not considered acceptable. With the exception of the south-east, most of Tassie's best wilderness is National Park, and they take a very dim view of wild camping and the lighting of fires. Now, sure, you can do it anyway and hope you don't get caught, but I'm not really that sort. And that big, unrestricted forest in the south-east is proper untravelled wilderness. Very difficult to get into, no tracks, and you're typically going to make less than 5km a day.

I might've found things different if I'd had access to independent transport. But they're very big on the whole "leave no trace" business...

Fires are allowed in the national parkes but not on the hotest days in the summer.
And for you not being that sort nor am i.
I was making a point you can be in the bush 20 minits from hobart .
I think you will find as long as you are doing no harm and respecting the countryside
you are welcome to use the country side.

 

[gregorach]

I may have been misinformed then. I was under the impression that open fires were only allowed in the barbecues in the formal camp sites.

 

[stephendedwards]

But the aboriginies never seem to have done much of any use. (except explore the more interesting plants and animals possibly due to the extinction of the megafauna, which may have been due to them, though more likley to climate change)

And precisely on what do you base this observation? The Australian Aborigines populated the continent for 50,000 years living where white settlers perished and without causing the catastrophic damage we see today. Frankly if that is not doing "much of any use" then I'll opt for being useless.

Stephen

 

[swagman]

The Australian Aborigines populated the continent for 50,000 years living where white settlers perished and without causing the catastrophic damage we see today. Frankly if that is not doing "much of any use" then I'll opt for being useless.

Stephen[/QUOTE]

I agree Stephendedwards well said.

 

[commandocal]

There are , Nature reserves, but exactly are that - they are reserved they are their to look at and walk through, we would be able to camp in them if we ALL followed the no trace rule but the FC wont take the chance thus dont let you camp, Me thinks there should be a club, course proper bushcraft/survival/good camping people can join to show the FC they arnt going to burn down the last forest

 

[Tengu]

But the aboriginies didnt achieve much, say, compared to the probably very similar ice age europeans.

Their art, mere daubings which are uninterpretable. (European artists you stood a chance of recognising what animal they were attempting to depict, indeed such records are used by paelentologists to recontruct the animals. A lot of african cave art is also crude, but it tells a story also)

They didnt build much, nor did they have clothes (as opposed to the europeans who in their few self depictions were snappy dressers)

We dont know much about the european technology, but what little we have seen was well made (and of course, just because you have poor stone tools means nothing, possibly your stone is poor quality, or you concentrated in other areas)

The boomerang, that was impressive (but many societies had throwing sticks, Im not sure that the returning sort were unique to australia. The ancient egyptians had them, and interestingly, another application of the technology they had was to carve gliders in the form of birds.)

Their language? I know nothing on that, but they had a great many languages, and a certainly sophisticated mythology, so I have no doubt they would have had an impressive command of words. The Yaghan indians of Tierra del Fuego were another extreemly primitive group (probably more so than the aborigines) but their language was sophisticated in the extreeme.

They couldnt count, but they didnt need to. (actualy they could count, they had a binary system, 1, 2,1-2, 2-1, 1-1-2...it did not get them very far, its interesting to note the primitive societies that had very interesting (some would say cumbersome) counting systems. But then the Greeks and romans had the dratted roman numerals...)

You talk about them not changing anything, but thats not a human trait, that is an animals. We shouldnt judge them as animals, nor as museum pieces. (but their skills are worth learning, adaptabilty is a good human trait)

 

[British Red]

Hmmm

Western man thinks he is a highly advanced being because he invented cars, electrical power, oil dependence, intensive farming and over popuation, whilst the aborigines took only what they need and had no concept of land ownership.

I rather suspect aborigines think they are more intelligent for exactly the same reason.

Your measures Tengu are not my measures

Red

 

[JonnyP]

Tengu...Are you on Alan Rickmans side in the film Quigley down under...? Get them Abbo's out of my way, cos I need to expand....
I have more respect for the abouriginals in what they achieved, (yes achieved, living in harmony with nature, taking only what they need, living simply and not having the desire to change cos they had all they needed) than I do for modern man, who has been to the moon etc....