I agree - it's a lot more compact and the blade shape is significantly different from a Skookum...
Why no Production Skookum Bushtool
- Thread starter Danceswithhelicopters
- Start date
I agree - it's a lot more compact and the blade shape is significantly different from a Skookum...
Well, Rod Garcia's web page is quoting 2009 as if it is the latest date, for a price of $200. Inflation in general would have that at $280 today, but if there is a market that will pay $320 then that $280 is too low.
Nice video
Possibly so. The question was whether anyone was doing a production style, not whether they were still available
The manufacturer's website shows most are sold out. If they run batches I would think they have something, then sell out, then have to wait till more are made.A lot of outdoor equipment is sold out.
One year ago I went into the largest outdoor equipment shop in Berlin and it was nearly empty.
People weren't allowed to meet each other indoors and went outdoors, that's all.
One year ago I went into the largest outdoor equipment shop in Berlin and it was nearly empty.
People weren't allowed to meet each other indoors and went outdoors, that's all.
Just to reiterate a previous comment Rob Evans Bushcrafter makes two different skookum clones, his own Bushtool which is a fantastic knife and his Mors Kochanski Tribute Knife, both similar to the Skookum without the 10 yr waiting list.. Also the Ray Mears Woodlore Pro is like a stretched Skookum and a fantastic knife.
Do you not think that would be opening a massive can of worms - where would that leave all the Ray Mears Woodlore/ Bushcraft cloners for example?
Don't much care for canned worms. Sometimes sounds like someone is uncomfortable with the implications of a debate going in unmanageable directions.
It is not as if this particular item, the Skookum, emerged from an anonymous collective consciousness, and therefore becomes the exploitable property of all. Fifteen years ago, Garcia applied himself, designed and produced an appealing, well-thought through piece which was priced affordably and thus rapidly became much-loved at a particular point in the popular mythology of bushcraft. He had the wit to involve Kochanski early in the process. It's his to exploit and benefit from.
Maybe we don't have to be too assertive around who designs or makes what and who benefits from the proceeds. There are often better things to worry about. I get that. But, 'whatabout' arguments aren't, well, arguments really. We have licensing and copyright agreements for a reason; to prevent ingenious, creative but poorly resourced people getting ripped off or having their livelihoods undermined when their innovations are pilfered.
In lots of ways, it doesn't even matter if Garcia is quite happy that other makers copy his knife with his permission. In fact, it doesn't matter if he is happy with people copying his knife without his permission either! Possibly he benefits reputationally by being so generous. But, it is certainly a generosity on his part, because the question is a broader one about general principles of intellectual and other property rights. Much as some of us would prefer it otherwise, capitalism is based largely on the frictionless regulation of ownership. Small, entrepreneurial businesses like Garcia's are as much the ones intended to benefit from the protections afforded by that economic and legal understanding as larger corporations.
Duffing up 'small-guy' operations over copyright infringement doesn't often do a lot for one's prestige. Imagine what this site would have made of, I don't know, Mick Spain being hauled off to court. So, just because Ray Mears may have seen a grander marketing opportunity in terms of the narrative he was building in the early 2000s by not pursuing potential copyright claims about his knife (which he'd possibly have lost, in any case), that doesn't mean it is OK to nick people's ideas and profit from their efforts in tool design and brand development.
Sometimes sounds like someone is uncomfortable with the implications of a debate going in unmanageable directions.It is not as if this particular item, the Skookum, emerged from an anonymous collective consciousness, and therefore becomes the exploitable property of all. Fifteen years ago, Garcia applied himself, designed and produced an appealing, well-thought through piece which was priced affordably and thus rapidly became much-loved at a particular point in the popular mythology of bushcraft. He had the wit to involve Kochanski early in the process. It's his to exploit and benefit from.
Maybe we don't have to be too assertive around who designs or makes what and who benefits from the proceeds. There are often better things to worry about. I get that. But, 'whatabout' arguments aren't, well, arguments really. We have licensing and copyright agreements for a reason; to prevent ingenious, creative but poorly resourced people getting ripped off or having their livelihoods undermined when their innovations are pilfered.
In lots of ways, it doesn't even matter if Garcia is quite happy that other makers copy his knife with his permission. In fact, it doesn't matter if he is happy with people copying his knife without his permission either! Possibly he benefits reputationally by being so generous. But, it is certainly a generosity on his part, because the question is a broader one about general principles of intellectual and other property rights. Much as some of us would prefer it otherwise, capitalism is based largely on the frictionless regulation of ownership. Small, entrepreneurial businesses like Garcia's are as much the ones intended to benefit from the protections afforded by that economic and legal understanding as larger corporations.
Duffing up 'small-guy' operations over copyright infringement doesn't often do a lot for one's prestige. Imagine what this site would have made of, I don't know, Mick Spain being hauled off to court. So, just because Ray Mears may have seen a grander marketing opportunity in terms of the narrative he was building in the early 2000s by not pursuing potential copyright claims about his knife (which he'd possibly have lost, in any case), that doesn't mean it is OK to nick people's ideas and profit from their efforts in tool design and brand development.
Last edited:
There is a fair bit of Alan Wood in the design of the Woodlore.
I suppose there isn't really much of a line between a single craftsman copying someone else's successful design, a small business being made to do the same (as has been done with the Woodlore), or a big company going into mass production. However I personally feel that the ethics become harder to justify the bigger and more profitable the venture becomes and the smaller and less well off the originator is.
I suppose there isn't really much of a line between a single craftsman copying someone else's successful design, a small business being made to do the same (as has been done with the Woodlore), or a big company going into mass production. However I personally feel that the ethics become harder to justify the bigger and more profitable the venture becomes and the smaller and less well off the originator is.
It's just about permission, whether you have it, from whom and on what terms.
Otherwise, copying, especially for profit, is still taken to be fine, I suppose.
It's just that trying to justify it makes you look like you are knowingly in the wrong and wriggling, often hotly and often uncaring in the language and insults one might bandy in that kind of panic. It is very undignified, unpleasant to see and usually embarrassing all round.
Otherwise, copying, especially for profit, is still taken to be fine, I suppose.
It's just that trying to justify it makes you look like you are knowingly in the wrong and wriggling, often hotly and often uncaring in the language and insults one might bandy in that kind of panic. It is very undignified, unpleasant to see and usually embarrassing all round.
Last edited:
If we talk about the Skookum Bush Tool the problem is that it is ,so far I understood, designed after the specifications by Mors Kochanski and highly recommended by him to everybody from the perspective of a survival instructor. But the maker Garcia doesn't deliver as many as people would like to buy. There is a waiting list of perhaps ten years now. Second hand they sell for more than the double price as new, what's an insane price for a daily carried belt knife.
Garcia hinders people to use the by Mors Kochanski designed and recommended knife because he neither employs people to help him with the production nor talks to a factory that's able to make it in a mass production, like for example the successful cooperation between Roger Harrington and Casström.
That reminds on the Mors Pot that you could in the end only buy if you ordered with it the Four Dogs wood burning stove for a pretty high amount of money although the pot was designed to hang under a tripod over open camp fire, promoted by Mors Kochanski with the mantra "The more you know the less you carry". That ended with the slightly different steel version Pathfinder Bush Pot by David Canterburry and the end of the production of the original Mors Pot.
In both cases people occupied Kochanski's idea but did not adopt the thoughts behind that these pieces of equipment should be affordable and used by everybody who needs them. And that's what disturbs people who think about it.
The Pathfinder Bush Pot has slightly other advantages than the original Mors Pot but is actually more or less the same design. And in my opinion it was well done by Dave Canterbury to make it accessible on a pocket money budget.
And if Garcia doesn't open this way himself I would appreciate if someone who is able to sell that design in a good quality and higher amount for a sensible price simply makes a copy and offers it to Mors Kochanskis followers.
Mors Kochanski obviously wanted to teach as many people as possible about the right skills and equipment. And it surely wasn't meant that people occupy his name and use his design to make some sort of exclusive expensive thing from it.
Garcia hinders people to use the by Mors Kochanski designed and recommended knife because he neither employs people to help him with the production nor talks to a factory that's able to make it in a mass production, like for example the successful cooperation between Roger Harrington and Casström.
That reminds on the Mors Pot that you could in the end only buy if you ordered with it the Four Dogs wood burning stove for a pretty high amount of money although the pot was designed to hang under a tripod over open camp fire, promoted by Mors Kochanski with the mantra "The more you know the less you carry". That ended with the slightly different steel version Pathfinder Bush Pot by David Canterburry and the end of the production of the original Mors Pot.
In both cases people occupied Kochanski's idea but did not adopt the thoughts behind that these pieces of equipment should be affordable and used by everybody who needs them. And that's what disturbs people who think about it.
The Pathfinder Bush Pot has slightly other advantages than the original Mors Pot but is actually more or less the same design. And in my opinion it was well done by Dave Canterbury to make it accessible on a pocket money budget.
And if Garcia doesn't open this way himself I would appreciate if someone who is able to sell that design in a good quality and higher amount for a sensible price simply makes a copy and offers it to Mors Kochanskis followers.
Mors Kochanski obviously wanted to teach as many people as possible about the right skills and equipment. And it surely wasn't meant that people occupy his name and use his design to make some sort of exclusive expensive thing from it.
Last edited:
The biggest problem I have with the Skookum is that Garcia doesnt respond to email enquires at all making it impossible to order one in the first place even if you can live with the 10yr waiting list. So if someone else makes a decent version of this knife then I will buy it, and have done so, and if Mr Garcia gets nothing out of that all he has to do is look in the mirror to find the person responsible for that.
He's not using it properly so we'll steal it off him? Well, that's quite an evolution in any theory of property
I quite like the knife. Not a lot, just a bit. I put my name on the list in 2009 expecting a two and a half year wait at that time. Got an email about a year later saying it was ready, but I passed.
The main negative about the knife is the butt-plate. An accident just waiting to happen. I somehow doubt they are ever used that much though; the knives I mean. Come to think of it, maybe someone should go round and steal all the unused ones.
I quite like the knife. Not a lot, just a bit. I put my name on the list in 2009 expecting a two and a half year wait at that time. Got an email about a year later saying it was ready, but I passed.
The main negative about the knife is the butt-plate. An accident just waiting to happen. I somehow doubt they are ever used that much though; the knives I mean. Come to think of it, maybe someone should go round and steal all the unused ones.
I somehow doubt they are ever used that much though; the knives I mean. Come to think of it, maybe someone should go round and steal all the unused ones.
I have to admit to using my S30V version regularly, particularly when I'm carving or working with wood. I like the directness and apparent simplicity of its design and Rod Garcia did a very fine job in making it.
It seems to have become a bit like the Alan Wood Woodlore in terms of folk wanting one. It would certainly be an idea for Rod to approach a good, more industrial knifemaker to help in the blade's production, much as Wilkinson Sword did for Alan Wood and Woodlore. Maybe he has a reason to resist that move 'to the dark side' of a more commercial business model but I, for one, don't know what it is.
