Fight or Flight

"It's the cold, cold heart that kills"

This may seem like an odd, slightly off topic in a survival and disaster preparedness blog, but fighting for ones life, literally/physically, is a fundamental necessity of survival. When it comes down to it, it is possibly the core of survival (securing ones personal safety not only from nature and happenstance, but from others that will do you harm). I am not a violent person and this is a topic that I reluctantly discuss, as I find the mechanics of it distasteful. Nevertheless, I have formally studied the ways of violence throughout my life, in martial arts, as an MP, as a soldier, in executive protection, and security. In this context, I will be discussing fighting as it pertains to self-defence or the defence of others.

Fighting for your life, or defending oneself, is a fundamental right under Natural Law. If another organism threatens death or bodily injury, every organism has a right to fight back with at least an equal amount of force. I don't want to get too political here, but I firmly believe in respect for competent lawful authority, but even agents of the government are not exempt from human law or natural law. The decisions involved in whether to fight or not occur largely involuntarily in the reptilian sub-brain in all of us, the famous "fight or flight" instinct. I would merely add that there exists a third category, the "freeze" or non-reaction which I theorize are people caught somewhere between the fight or flight conflict. I have personally witnessed all of these reactions in people under extreme stress. It's interesting to note that outward demeanor and comportment in the absence of stress or in simulated stress (in training) is absolutely no indicator of how a person will react under real stress. Really, there is no shame in any of these reactions, it's all naturally involuntary.

I only make a slight distinction between fighting and killing (using deadly force) so the words are interchangable in my lexicon. It is just that the only reason to fight (for me) is when no other alternative is available. Once the decision is reached to fight, the next objective is to end the fight as effectively as possible.


Fighting encompasses a vast spectrum of skills, techniques and abilities. Unarmed combat is a whole separate topic that I may eventually write about another day. I will only address unarmed combat here briefly just to say that it is important to remember the 4th (or "forgotten") range, and, that it should be avoided whenever possible/practical. Actual effectiveness in unarmed combat takes professional training and years of practice and conditioning. Although undoubtedly useful (and confidence building), I find that the actual benefit vs. time/effort expenditure to be a poor ratio. All I'm saying is, if your thing is martial arts, more power to you, but as Colonel Colt said (I'm paraphrasing here), any two-bit punk with a Saturday night special pretty much trumps even the best trained black belt. In martial arts, there is traditionally kicking range, punching range, and then there is grappling. The 4th range that I alluded to is "trapping" range (between punching range and grappling). It's a Kung Fu idea developed by the late, great Bruce Lee. Again, though I don't recommend ever getting into an unarmed combat situation, when of if it happens, I recommend utilizing this "trapping" range. One, because it is a seldom exploited range it will give you an advantage over those unfamiliar with it. Two, because it is simple to learn, doesn't require great strength, and pretty much levels the playing field regardless of size or gender.

Now when I recommend avoiding unarmed combat, I really mean in preference for "armed" combat. Use the simplest tool available that will end the fight quickly. Sometimes this is a firearm. Again, that is an entirely different discussion about that class of weapon that tends to be the epitome of our current technology. Again, I plan to cover this topic separately.

There is seldom a reason NOT to arm oneself. Everyday life is surrounded by potential weapons if one uses imagination. Any object that can be held in the hand, is reasonably solid, pointed or sharp, and has mass can be a weapon, coffee mug, stapler, vase, glass bottle, paperweight, metal belt buckle, large seashell, ball point pens, slate coasters, screwdriver, brass picture frame, brick mantle, fireplace poker, floor lamp, electrical cords, d-cell batteries, hardwood floor, folding chair are all common objects that I am looking at now (as I type) that are all potential deadly weapons.

Just behind firearms on the spectrum are other missile weapons. This includes those primitive weapons that one can possibly make in the field by hand, like clubs, throwing sticks, boomerangs, lances, spears, atlatls, slings, slingshots, bows, arrows, crossbows. Not to mention ballistas, catapults, and trebuchets.

One should choose the deadliest hand weapon that one can practically handle. Assuming some nominal physical ability (like the ability to swing ones arm), it's a matter of choosing a tool with the right length, weight, and potential for trauma (whether it's piercing, slashing, blunt or hacking trauma).



Now, it may seem like getting a huge double bladed battleaxe or a giant hand-and-half sword would be a good tactical choice and would just overwhelm anyone if you're strong enough to wield one, but in reality human arms get tired rapidly, and larger heavier weapons are slower and harder to reset between swings. If it's a single one on one melee, it may not matter, but if it is a part of a larger, longer duration pitched battle, then exhaustion becomes a factor for most people. In some ancient battles, men fought from sunrise to sunset sometimes.

For the average person (if you do not possess exceptional strength, exceptional dexterity, or exceptional training or skill with a certain weapon or technique) the ideal hand to hand weapon should be short (12 to 36 inches), weigh about 2 lbs, have a quick reset time between blows, durable enough to last a few engagements, and should have the trauma potential to end the fight with a single strike/attack.

One school of thought/tactic is to use a long weapon or pole arm to keep an opponent beyond the striking range of their shorter weapon. It is a reasonable tactic, however, it requires some skill to be effective, is a bit heavier and fatiguing, and generally occupies both hands. The Greek (or even Zulu) shield/spear combo was essentially using a shorter spear in one hand, however, it was not really using the range advantage of a true polearm.

A couple of short light fast reacting weapons in each hand is my best suggestion for the minimally trained, but physically able. Sticks are sufficient (tree branches) and can be upgraded from there. Thicker or stronger sticks (clubs, nightsticks, batons). Spikes, hard additions, and weights on the stick (mace, flail). Sharp objects attached to the stick (ax, tomahawk). Making the entire stick a sharp object (sword). Introducing a curve to the sharp edge (machete, khukri, bolo knife). Making it stronger (naval cutlass, waki-zashi).

A pair of simple slashing/hacking weapons is effective and has a relatively short learning curve with little training or practice, an important consideration since most of us don't have time to become kendo masters.

So if I had my druthers, if I could pick any weapon from an armoury, my hand to hand combat weapon of choice would be the short Japanese samurai sword, the wakizashi. Very sharp, very durable, lightweight, lethal in multiple modes (slash, stab, pummel). Real samurai swords are very rare, expensive and tend to attract lots of attention when carried around, so close substitutes might be a short machete or khukri. Because of the unlikelihood of having swords or machetes on one's person, my next weapon of choice would be the ever-versatile Special Forces shovel or Spetznaz spade, because it is just an innocent "little" tool and hides in plain sight. It's a club, hand ax, tomahawk, and short thrusting spear all in one, as well as a very practical tool. With minimal practice, it is devastatingly effective.


I'm not an "axe" man myself, but tomahawks are very good melee weapons and would probably be my next (third) choice. Perhaps a good testimonial to their utility is that they are still used by US Army Rangers today. Applying modern thinking to ancient weapons, a tomahawk possesses many of the best characteristics of a close quarters fighting weapon, relatively light weight (around 2 lbs), potentially disabling blunt trauma due to weight, momentum and leverage, potentially deadly penetrative trauma (esp the heel or spike), a bit of range (longer than knives or extended arm), doubles as an effective missile weapon almost instantly, and not to mention a handy tool also. Notable disadvantages, it takes some skill/practice to wield (or throw) effectively, not a good parry weapon, and somewhat slow to reset after a hit (since the blade or spike tends to stick).

I think I will end my list of practical hand to hand weapons with folding batons (ASP type) or the old tonfa/PR-24 type side handle baton. Even a small aluminum t-ball bat or fish billy make good weapons in this class. Make no mistake, a simple durable stick does tremendous blunt trauma which can be just as deadly as a slashing or penetrative attack. Blunt trauma transfers through helmets, padding and armour. A police type baton is a lightweight, durable, well-balanced stick and in the hands of a trained user is a surprisingly effective weapon. I recommend using them in pairs, like Philippine Escrima style, or even Okinawan Tonfa style.

Finally, because they're primarily designed as fighting tools (weapons) I will mention that I carry my trusty old Kabar tanto and/or my Cold Steel Ti-lite stiletto as tertiary back-up weapons. I mention them, but I don't necessarily recommend the use of knives unless one has received training and practiced their use. 90% of what I have personally witnessed is woefully bad (even comic) knife technique, probably learned from watching too much TV. There are three types of knife fighting generally used by professionals in the modern age. Like, unarmed combat it is a subject that deserves detailed description, so I will discuss it under a separate article.

When You Have To Go

This is sort of a delicate subject that is not much discussed in polite company or in many survival discussions, yet it is one of the basic necessary functions of biological organisms, that is.... going. Going to the lav-a-"tree", lightening your load, making mud, taking the Browns to the Superbowl, pinching a loaf, #2, 10-100. By this I also mean all the other personal excretions, discharges, and micturations that one occasionally needs to do as a healthy human being.

Without getting into clinical detail, I plan to briefly discuss the "how to" strategies when a modern "sit down" flush toilet is not available, and then go on to discuss the clean-up and hygiene issues more extensively. Some of you may be chuckling now or may be dismissive about the importance of having a good procedure, but I can aver that there can potentially be some serious consequences of not doing it right (or well). And I daresay, there are many city-dwellers who have never had the experience of having to go in the woods and are totally baffled (sometimes with hilarious results).

Some cultures that I have seen have no sense of shyness about these natural bodily functions. It's many a time that I've seen men and women squattin' in plain view beside the road, and even in some modern cities, a guy whipping it out and peeing against the side of a building is not uncommon. It's actually a fascinating and eye-opening aspect of anthropology to learn how different people around the world "go". And I am by no means looking down on or implying that we in the US (the Western world) have any claim to superiority in this regard. In fact, I'd say that the common American system (flush toilets and TP) is rather primitive and relatively unhygienic even compared to other countries that I have seen (like Japan, with freshly sanitized seats, seat warmers, front and back wash systems, moist towelettes, blow dryers, even optional "noise" for the shy). If it seems excessive, just think of it another way. Like perhaps the best, most hygienic system would be to have a complete shower/wash down after each bodily excretion. The Japanese have just modernized the bidet and created a mini-shower system.

I think the first consideration in "going" is considering a suitable spot. Secluded seems to be the main consideration, but even more important is "secure" and safe (as far as sanition). Don't go where you're vulnerable to enemy fire or can be caught literally with your pants down if something attacks. So choose a place with limited avenues of approach, cover or camouflage on three sides, and good visibility on the fourth direction. If you are in open terrain, a depression in the ground might be the only option. "Go" with your back to the tree, facing outward. Part of "secure" means checking for sharp objects, thorns, poisonous plants, fire ant hills/trails, hornet's nests, badger dens, coiled snakes.... first. I think everyone's heard the old joke about getting snakebit down there and someone having to suck out the poison (punchline: "you're going to die"). Safe means not contaminating your campsite or worse yet your water source. A minimum of 50 yards uphill from water is a good general rule.

Now, I completely understand the arguments about so-called "low impact camping" and leave nothing behind, but, you know, 1) in a survival situation, I say normal rules are suspended (only Natural Law applies... so beg, borrow, steal, kill or be killed, and defecate wherever you need to). It's all good. 2) humans are animals too, and they have just as much right to "be" in a place as any other organism. I am not advocating blatantly vandalizing the wilderness, de-spoiling a biome, or being wasteful of natural resources, but merely leaving footprints, crunching foliage, exhaling carbon dioxide, (gasp!) digging a hole or making a campfire, and leaving normal, bio-degradable waste products in the woods like any other animal is NOT a crime IMO. Unnatural waste and destruction is a crime, trash, careless use of fire, polluting water, marring trees, and as far as I am concerned, killing unnecessarily (for sport). So if you feel you can spare the time/energy.... please bag up your poop like some outdoors enthusiasts proscribe and haul it out with you, or.... just make a reasonable attempt to make it part of the biome (covering it with dirt and detritus so that natural decomposition starts). The exception might be in an evasion situation, where leaving signs like that behind might assist pursuers.

The mechanics of going au naturel involves doffing equipment and getting access. If you are with a team or a partner, I would leave large equipment and gear with them (to secure). I loosen personal equipment, but try to keep it on my person. I use military 2-point suspenders that readily unhook from my belt, something to consider when putting on one's layers. So LBE, suspenders, waist belt, then fly and I'm ready to go. No matter how many bottom layers I wear, I just pull all the layers down past my knee joints as one. I'm comfortable just squatting, but occasionally a natural "seat" or leaning against the tree or rock is restful. Do NOT sit on the ground... lol. If you're male, I recommend doing #1 and #2 as separate functions. For a "tactical" sh**, try to go as quickly as feasible. Hopefully, you will have a buddy to stand security for you (like a meerkat.... lol). Leaning forward, and rocking are suggested techniques for getting it started if that's a problem.

Before I streamlined my "system" I used to carry around compact packets of toilet paper, liquid hand sanitizer, a portable John, matches, and disposable toilet seat covers in my "kit" (about the size of a soap case). I still have all of these items, and they are still effective in various situations, but for the most basic outdoor functioning, I now just carry a single flat packet of 10 moist anti-bacterial towelettes. They are substantially thick and work well as toilet paper. Afterward, they can be used for hand washing. And then among the many field uses, they are also handy for a waterless "field bath" (I can do a rudimentary personal hygiene at the end of the day with just 3 wipes).
Important: be sure that no sand, grit, and other contaminant objects have either been picked up by one's underwear or adhered to one's skin, because when one needs to be mobile the smallest grain of sand will cause chafing, irritation, breaks in the skin, subsequent infection, fever, and debilitation. You see where I'm going with this.

Whether they are individually packaged (like at KFC), in resealable 10 packs, larger household resealable 48 packs or the economy sized plastic dispensers, the moist towelette is an invaluable travel companion in general. Having some in your coat/vest pocket, in your satchel or rucksack, or secreted away in every side pocket of your luggage can come in handy in many travel situations, from messy ill-supplied public restrooms to freshening up at the end of the day on a long road trip when a shower is not available. I try to get the wipes that have the most extra features... aloe, vitamin E, anti-microbial, witch hazel, lotion, etc. The only ones that I tend to avoid for personal hygiene use are the ones with alcohol and/or other chemical de-con agents like chlorine bleach. Those can irritate sensitive areas of skin.

Let us briefly consider the purpose and function of "underwear". Despite what it has evolved (mutated)) into in the prurient allure and fashion meaning of the word, (ala Victoria's Secret), at the most fundamental level, underwear, or the layer of clothing closest to the skin, is either a support garment, insulative layer, and/or a liner (or barrier). For both males and females it keeps our soft and vulnerable parts safe from injury also (pinching, abrasions, chafing, etc). And bluntly, underwear serves as a barrier layer between one's bodily contamination residue, secretions and discharges, and one's more expensive, harder to launder outer clothing. A diaper is another type of liner. So I bring up this subject only to consider... it is possible in exigent situations to introduce an extra layer or layers of liners possibly as a temporary barrier. Something that you can do in, excuse the expression, a pinch.

When I travel, I carry along a handy little disposable, portable gel-John. It is basically this plastic bag containing this powder chemical substance. The opening has a built in "female adaptor" so that females can use it also (standing up?). When one pees into it, the liquid urine is instantly converted into a thick, easier to manage gel-like substance, that doesn't slosh or spill and can be disposed of in a trash can. It's a life-saver in certain road trip situations.

Almost any receptacle can be "lined" with a plastic bag and serve as a commode for a shelter or disaster scene. I invested in a "toilet seat" that snaps onto the top of a 5 gallon paint or laundry detergent barrel. Blue odor neutralizing toilet chemicals are readily available. Don't forget to stock TP, moist wipes, hand sanitizer, reading material, and extra liners, stocked in organizer pockets made by bucket boss. There are many commercially available variations on the portable chem toilet, some more solid and elaborate, some more flimsy and spare, even inflatable (though I wouldn't want to be the one to re-inflate one of these).

When outdoors or able to use surrounding open land, especially with multiple people to service, conventional latrines (like slit trenches) can be dug and utilized. Designating a well thought out area for this function keeps people from randomly contaminating living areas, food prep areas, potable water sources, and minimizes redundancy and workload.

Provisions

Today I thought I would touch upon the subject of longer term and bulkier survival foods. Like what kind of stuff should one store and stock in the shelter or go-bag for self-sustenance. Remember the public safety agencies are warning that citizens should be prepared to be self-sufficient for at least 3 days (72 hours) without outside assistance. Actually for most households that is not a very tall order depending on how much non-perishable, canned or ready to eat foods are in ones kitchen or pantry.

Eating perishables from the refrigerator, and later, the freezer would probably be the wise first choice. If all power failed, the contents of the refrigerator would almost certainly be safe for the first 24 hours (if you don't open the refrigerator too much). Frozen foods in the freezer would be at least 48 hours. Treat the freezer as you would an ice chest or portable cooler (as long as the ice and melty ice lasts), thereafter it's like a refrigerator.

Bulk non-perishables can be the basis of longterm survival. Wheat (flour), corn and grain, rice, potatoes, yams, and starchy roots have been the staple of diets for all human cultures the worldover, and indeed, a supply of any of these items (along with water) can insure survival for a considerable time. The more diverse a culture's food supply, the more adaptable it is to natural disaster, climate change or crop failure. Yams, potatoes and other starchy vegetable roots have gram per gram the most immediate nutritional value, however, they are also the most perishable of the staples listed. Wheat and processed cereal products (breads, pasta, flatbreads, and cakes) unfortunately have the least food value per gram. Rice is a good balance between the two, but rice is very resource intensive to produce (water, space, energy). It may just be a cultural bias on my part, but I prefer the compactness, convenience, and comforting satisfaction of rice. A 50 lb rice sack would amply supply my personal needs for a year. I tend to buy multiple, vacuum sealed 10 lb bags and stack them in storage.

Bulk foods for one's survival shelter should ideally have good nutritional value (read: calories per ounce). Beans, corn starch, peanut butter, sugar, powdered milk, baking mix, and pasta are all good readily available things available in bulk. Taste and variety are important (for morale) so stocking supplemental seasonings is also a good idea, chicken bouillion, salt, pepper, chili powder, crushed red pepper, garlic powder, lemon pepper, curry powder, seasoning salt, Italian mix, and cinnamon. Common condiments especially in single serve packets are great to have, soy sauce, tabasco, ketchup, lemon juice, barbecue sauce, sweet and sour sauce, mustard. Honey is an excellent survival sweetener. It will essentially last indefinitely at room temperature as it is technically a liquid without enough moisture to spoil or support microbes. Blocks of honey have been "thawed" after 100 years and found edible.

The rest of my bulk non-perishable survival foods are canned foods. Canning is a method of long term food storage in use since the 18th century, basically vacuum sealing foods into airtight metal cans. Without air, decomposition is suspended. All of my canned foods are carefully marked with the date of purchase, which allows me to approximately consume my canned foods in chronological order. I have a core of canned meats, turkey spam, tuna, chicken, oysters, clams, and lots and lots of beans, pastas, soups, chilis and stews. Then I largely depend on my canned supplies to provide me with vegetable and fruits in the longterm (the fresh stuff out of the refrigerator and frozen out of the freezer being exhausted first). I do get a variety of fruits and vegetables, but fully half of my cans are corn because of it's higher food value. Again, variety is not an inconsequential consideration as monotony brings down morale. An occasional surprise, like premium olives or fruit pie filling can be a welcome "treat" and morale booster.

I've already mentioned that I am a big fan of dry, powdered, dehydrated foods. Instant soups, instant coffee, instant cocoa, instant energy beverage supplement my "portable" disaster supplies. I always have a case or two of chocolate or coffee flavoured Ensure onhand also, each being a high-protein, high-calorie meal replacement. When I need to have a walking meal or a working meal, I sip down an Ensure to keep me going as I go.

Now I'll talk about specialized disaster supplies. These are food supplies specially designed or specially packaged to be long-lasting, compact/portable, and nutritionally balanced.

The core of these supplies is the Mainstay or Datrex non-provient ration. It was developed for lifeboat survival kits to keep one alive without creating thirst. It's basically like a dense, high-calorie shortbread loaded with fat. Mainstays taste kind of sweetish neutral to me. I think Datrex is tastier (not that it matters, in an emergency I'd eat lard). They come in vacuum sealed foil-mylar packages shaped like perfect rectangular bricks or slabs, about the size of a double compact disc case (like the soundtrack to Saturday Night Fever). This brick or slab is divided into 9 cubic sections for Mainstay, or 18 wafers in the case of Datrex (pictured above). Supposedly, one Mainstay will supply the nutritional needs of one person for one day, so by extrapolation, one cube equals approximately one "meal". So doing the math for Datrex, a package has 3600 calories if 18 wafers have 200 calories each, enough for 1 person for 72 hours. They have a 5 to 10 year shelf life if stored optimally without temperature fluctuation. Both products take up so little space that they are an excellent option as a fallback option for a shelter, car or go-bag.

Before I consume my Mainstays, I have a supply of military MREs and other freeze-dried backpacker's meals. Most of the so-called MREs sold commercially are civilian copies, or repackaged MREs (usually identified by the clear plastic bag). Military MREs in light brown or older dark brown plastic bags(not readily available to civilians as they are technically illegal to re-sell, as are MREs in yellow plastic bags which are disaster relief supplies) are great complete, self-contained, portable 2500 calorie meals. After working out the bugs and listening to soldier input, the "new" modern MREs are very tasty and well designed (even to the extent that they can be made "hot", and provide both vegetarian and breakfast options too). Look for the four digit lot number on the cases. The last two digits represent the year of manufacture, and MREs are supposed to have only a 3-5 year shelf life. I will aver that I have consumed 10 year old MREs (and 20 year old C-rats) without any ill-effects. Freeze-dried backpackers meals are a delicious, hearty choice for quick, just add hot water meals. For what you get for the price, MREs are a better value IMO. It's best to buy these backpacker's meals on sale, in bulk. Though it is not readily available yet on the civilian market, I shall mention that there is a smaller, compact, modern LRRP version of the MRE. I haven't personally tried one yet, but I have seen them on pallets and know they exist.

Finally, though I've covered "snacks" and quick energy bars elsewhere, I'd like to mention some emergency starvation strategies. I will only disclaim that this information should be taken apocryphally. I tend to "graze" (snack constantly) and I keep a sack, or a tube, of trail mix type stuff close at hand (nuts, dried fruit, M&Ms, etc). If I do this, I am fine with skipping meals for a long time. Caffeine, though a diuretic, is an effective appetite suppressant also (and the basis of the diet pill industry). Eating something dense and starchy (slowly), followed by drinking a beverage tends to make me feel "full" (as the food seems to expand in the stomach). When water is short, putting something (candy, a button, even a pebble) in the mouth can keep your mouth salivating and staving off the sensation of thirst. A packet of Jell-O powder can give one a temporary short term sugar-rush energy burst. Remember though, that the physiological process of digestion requires water. When you are dehydrated, eating (esp foods with salts and protein) can dehydrate you further and make you sick. I've also blogged about the limits of human endurance as far as food. It might be comforting to know that the human body can survive a long, long time to actually starve without food (nominally a month, and anectodotally as much as three to SIX months!). If rations are limited and the likelihood of rescue is not imminent, some lifeboat survival instructions recommend not eating for the first 24 hours (using the body's stored reserves first). Cannabilism is a touchy issue. I guess when it comes down to it I'd just go back to there being no rules or laws in survival, do what you have to do. And as a personal decision, would you rather be a living survivor (forever looked down on by society) or a dead nice guy (who followed the rules to the end)?

Water... a biggie

"The shadows sway and seem to say tonight we pray for water,
Cool water.
And way up there He'll hear our prayer and show us where there's water,
Cool clear water."

It is high time that I blogged about water (actually, high time that I blogged here at all as I was on a long winter hiatus it seems). With the seemingly limitless and oh so convenient access to water in most of our daily lives, it's relative priority tends to wane into the background clutter of our lives. But make no mistake... water is what life is all about. It is in fact the essential element of civilization. In nature, not just during desperate survival situations, there are few things I can think of more important than water to humans, perhaps atmosphere at STP, gravity with planetary mass, a delicate temperature zone (distance from sun, seasonal tilt of planet), radiation protection (i.e. Van Allen Belts).

So what are the limits? Like, if you were trapped under rubble or in an open lifeboat in the middle of the ocean and had no access to potable water, how long could you survive. The definitive answer varies from human to human. Incredible feats of endurance have been recorded among desert Bedouins, Kalahari bushmen, and Australian aboriginals, cultures that exist in hot arid biomes. I've also heard of Tibetan monks that meditate for weeks. But for the average person, the human limit seems to be about 3 days. The process of dying from dehydration (thirst) is one of the most agonizingly painful and harrowing ordeals that can be experienced by man. The body is a machine, and almost every physiological process right down to the cellular level involves water, so if water is not available, systems start to shutdown, involuntarily. We've seen marathon runners and Iron-man triathletes that dehydrate and lose muscular and neurological control. Dementia effects severely dehydrated people and judgment is impaired, but in dire consequences, eventually the decision whether to drink urine, seawater, or blood comes up. I will discuss those options separately. Note: there are documented cases of survival beyond 3 days without water, but usually with permanent debilitating damage to organ systems (liver and renal failure, weakened cardiac muscles). Paradoxically, infants are among the most resilient as their bodies adapt and shutdown critical systems in times of deprivation. Infants have been pulled from the rubble of earthquakes and survived as long as a week after they had been buried.

For organization, I've divided this HUGE topic into 3 main categories/strategies: 1) finding or securing a source of water, and making it potable 2) storing water, after collecting or generating it and finally 3) carrying water when it becomes necessary to move.

Especially in the case of disaster (natural or manmade), once other priorities have been secured, one should think about short term and long term sources of water. Water for bodily hydration (drinking) is of course the primary concern, but remember the myriad secondary uses of water (cooking, sterilizing, cleaning, washing, hygiene, fire fighting, agriculture, etc.). In short term survival, such considerations may seem frivolous, but in the longer term situations these secondary considerations become increasingly important. One may avoid death by thirst, but may later die from infection or contamination if one ignores simple hygiene.

Faucets and taps are what we look to first for our water in "civilized" areas, but many types of disasters can disrupt the flow. Damaged or contaminated sources (dams, reservoirs, aqueducts), damaged or blocked pipes and water conduits, insufficient water or water pressure due to other priorities or peak demand, water pumping stations inoperative, maybe even deliberate shut-offs for public rationing or exigent circumstance. Part of my post-earthquake drill (here in California) has always been to fill up my bath tub and fill my empty pitchers and containers with water and if possible put some in the freezer. I'll blog more about this "earthquake drill" later in a separate article.

I think that I've mentioned this many times before, but a plastic bag, especially a tough little Zip-Loc, is an amazingly useful survival tool. But really, any watertight plastic bag (shopping, garbage, food storage, even garment and tarps) are great survival assets. Again, I plan to blog about this separately, but plastic bags or membranes have myriad uses when some imagination is applied. In the category of water alone, consider storage, portability, collecting, channeling and conduits, solar distilleries, and lining other more fragile or non-waterproof containers.

I know where my building's water heater tank is, which can be drained for potable water. A decorative fountain out front and a swimming pool in the back can serve as a source of potable "emergency" water in pinch. Part of my earthquake kit includes several gallon jugs of chlorine bleach for treating water, in addition to my Katydyne water filter system that I use for camping. Several blocks away, there is even a freshwater creek that runs through my neighbourhood which I might consider a water source of last resort (if I couldn't beg, borrow or steal from some other source). I will mention that there is a way one can make use of contaminated (like tainted with gasoline) or brackish water sources if the circumstances are dire. The large colon absorbs limited quantities of water into the body without absorbing contaminants (one of it's functions during digestion) so it is possible to hydrate by enema if one had the tools and knowledge. Also, if one has the knowledge and means, one can alternately hydrate intravenously.

I almost forgot to mention that along with drinking ample water try not to overlook the effects of perspiring and causing an imbalance in electrolytes. Under heavy exertion, taking a salt pill with every quart of water helps to retain water and keeps electrolyte levels in balance.

In the wilderness or survival situation consider that water always travels downhill or downstream with gravity. Therefore, look for more water sources to be found in draws, valleys, ravines, and depressions. Plantlife and trees are a strong indicator of water and are sometimes a source of water themselves, like water vines in the jungle, or rainwater or dew on leaves, collected in hollows, or condensate from plastic bags around branches. Even in arid climates, water may flow underground especially in depressions, riverbeds, and where telltale lines of vegetation grow. I've heard an apocryphal bush tale that all other animals follow the elephants (because supposedly they can smell subterranean water and will make for muddy watering holes in drought).

If one has the means, a private, secure, ample, readily available source of water is the optimum situation, a body of water, lakes, rivers, Artesian sources, a spring, a well, a cistern, or large water tank. Secondarily, more elaborate, technological means of trapping or extracting water are useful, like a rooftop rainwater trapping system, solar condensers, desalinization systems, and geo-thermal iceberg melters. I suppose the ultimate along this line would be like a NASA style Hydrogen Fuel Cell system which generates power and leaves behind molecular oxygen and pure distilled water as by-products.
Condensate is a ready source of pure drinking water, literally from the air. Morning dew and water that collects on the smooth waxy surfaces of plants as the temperature changes is available in almost any biome, even arid deserts. Putting a plastic bag around a branch of a plant will condense water vapour in the air and that which escapes from the plant also. This same concept can be used in the "solar still" (digging a hole, stretching plastic over it, with a container in the center to collect the condensate that forms on the inside). The efficiency of the still increases with exposure to the sun, and the amount of base moisture in the hole, the soil, foliage within, and even contaminated sources, like urine or seawater. What will condense out is pure distilled water, albeit in small quantities. Therefore making multiple stills is important.

Whatever your water source, if it is exposed to open air (not sealed or distilled) one can assume that source as possibly contaminated with micro-organisms, pollutants/particulates, and/or by-products of corrosion from the transmission mode (pipes). I am not a germophobe, but I prefer whenever feasible to drink only filtered water. Now what this means varies from city to city, but I happen to live in a city which has filtered (and carefully tested and monitored) water right from the tap. Therefore, I only consider the contaminants between the city filtering and the pipes leading to my domicile. I use a simple Brita water filter for my drinking water. For emergency back-up and camping use, I have a good top of the line portable Katydyne water filter system. My stored water is all namebrand bottled water, which is filtered water. Nothing more, nothing less. It amazes me what people pay for water these days. Note: about the only premium bottled water that I can genuinely taste/detect a difference is so-called Fiji water. I can take a blind taste test and find Fiji water readily. It is somehow... smoother, like lower viscosity. My free endorsement for Fiji water... LOL.

Boiling water of course is the age-old method for making water potable. But it has the slight drawback of being energy-intensive (fuel) and somewhat of an elaborate process (heating, boiling, cooling, storing), esp in a survival shelter. Sometimes therefore, chemical purification is more convenient. The drawback here is the detectable chemical taste and smell. I've always carried a tiny vial of Iodine water purification tablets in my survival kit since my Army days as a method of last resort. A part of every family/home earthquake disaster survival kit should be a gallon jug of chorine bleach. Chlorine has many uses in survival, but one of the most important is the ability to chemically purify large quantities of questionable water. Water purified by chemical means can be made more palatable by powdered flavourings, like iced tea.

Another purification method which I will mention briefly is the use of Ultra Violet light, mostly the handy UV wand that is currently in vogue. Now, I have field tested this method and I have had no ill effects, however, there is this annoying lack of complete confidence in this method. Supposedly swirling this lighted wand around in a water bottle for about a minute kills all the cooties and makes it safe to drink. But unlike other methods, filtering, boiling, adding chemicals, the UV wand method seems like a leap of faith that it worked. There is no confirmation. Plus, because it is an electronic light, the wand works best at full battery strength. As it reaches the end of it's battery life, I would presume that it gets less efficient. So if it may or may not kill 90% of the microbes, then there may come a time when the 10% of surviving microbes gives one debilitating dysentery right in the middle of a survival situation. Is it worth the gamble? I would only recommend the UV wand as a back-up method to use along with other methods.

Some survivalists opt to store water in large quantities, like in 55 gallon drums or military style 5 gallon "jerry" cans or jugs. There is nothing necessarily wrong with this strategy, especially for those in larger family groups and plan to survive in place (not being mobile). But I've always been of the "don't put your eggs into one basket" school of thought when it comes to survival. As resource wasteful as this may seem, I believe in keeping supplies/storing water in as many separate little containers as possible. Even in quantity, I'd rather keep my water in 1000 separate half liter water bottles than a single 500 liter drum. Why? far less risk of contamination/cross-contamination, less risk of total loss, more portability/adaptability, more options for immediate/secondary uses (freezing, flavouring, re-using, even recycling the containers).

Probably from my military indoctrination, I've habitually carried a "canteen" around with me, in civilian life, a water bottle. I am not very particular about my water bottles. I don't care if it is a re-used Pepsi bottle, clear Evian type bottle, a Lexan Nalgene bottle, or one of those currently popular lined aluminum or steel bottles. There are some key desirable features of course, but for the most part as long as the bottle holds water, is relatively clean and is refillable, it will suffice for me. Clear is good so that the contents/remaining contents can be seen. Durability is nice for rugged use. Graduations are helpful for rationing and monitoring intake. Wide mouth is desirable for hearty, satisfying gulping. "Taste-free" and non-reactive material/lining material is desirable (metal/plastic taste, BPA).

I was an early adopter of the "Camelback" concept and in fact own several of their earliest models. I embraced the concept and still believe there are many tangible advantages to the water bag and drinking tube system, among them, ergonomic carrying, hands-free/on-the-go hydration, decrease in volume of bladder as water is consumed, even secondary uses as a flotation device if necessary. In the end however, after about a decade of actual use, I have all but abandoned the concept and returned to using mostly Lexan water bottles, and keeping my Camelbaks for back-up and emergency use. Like what are the disadvantages of Camelbaks? Well, because water must be sucked through a long straw, a Camelbak is a demand system as opposed to water pouring freely with gravity into one's mouth. It makes a qualitative difference in hydration satisfaction IMO. Because you really cannot see exactly how much you are drinking, there is a tendency to (at least for me) to drink less. I've found that I tend to de-hydrate myself (coming home with half a bladder full) when I use the Camelbak. I tend to hesitate to refill the Camelbak bladder mid-hike or mid-expedition, not only because of the inconvenience of extracting the bladder out of my pack, but also the prospect of mixing and contaminating known potable water with questionable water sources. No matter how careful you are, there is always a little bit of "back wash" into the drinking tube, adding trace amounts of microbes, saliva, food particles into the collective water system. Without specialized maintenance and downtime, Camelbaks inevitably get cloudy, odd tasting water from microbe build-up. Also because of the location of the bladder, water is usually warmed by the body (good for snowmelt in the winter, but decidedly "unrefreshing" in hot weather). And, lastly, when my life depends on it, do I want all of my critical life giving water in one vinyl plastic bag? or in multiple, separate, indestructible Lexan bottles.

When on the move, I now prefer to carry multiple (6 or more) 500ml Lexan water bottles. Some are frozen (helping to keep other items cool as they melt down to refreshing ice water), some are flavoured (usually with ice tea for caffeine, but sometimes with Gatorade for electrolyte balance). Some are deep in my pack, some are in my pack pockets, one is always on my belt holster, and usually I put an extra bottle in my pants or jacket pocket. As I move along and consume water, I am constantly looking for good sources to refill my bottles (keeping each separate). If I lose one, it's not a complete disaster as I have other bottles.


Remember, water is the most important survival priority under most circumstances. Only rarely might the consideration of security (from a direct threat that will kill you immediately) supersede water in priority.

Little Travel Bottle

Today I am writing about the little travel-sized bottle that I use to carry shampoo.

I am a traveler. I love everything about traveling including the inconveniences and occasional privations. I complain little, actually need far less than average, and tend to thrive in the moment, no matter what the situation is, and I actually live for those "emergencies" when my skills, knowledge or willingness to act becomes an asset. That being said, I have put a lot of thought over the years on streamlining my travel techniques and my kit.

Case in point, I've even whittled down my "toiletry" kit from a conventionally sized compartmented bag with lots of "mini" products that mimics my medicine cabinet at home, down to just a small nylon mesh pouch with all the essentials which could fit in my pocket if necessary. Mostly I've found ways to make every object and every product do double or triple duty.

My choice of travel bottle for my shampoo/conditioner/soap is a good example. It is a seemingly very simple object, but choosing the right one (size, color, design, contents) can give one many "value added" advantages on the road.

First the bottle itself should be sized small enough in volume to be TSA compliant (3 oz) and an oblong shape which is easy to grip (that is, rather than spherical or too wide in any dimension that would make it difficult to hold onto when wet). A smooth, non-jagged shape (no sharp corners or edges) is also desireable. I find that 3 oz is just sufficient for about 3 showers/bathings/cleanings and perhaps a 4th by adding water and shaking it to rinse off the residue. Therefore, doing the math, maybe it's enough for a long weekend trip, or over a week out in the field (camping). Most of the time, I may not even have to use my own shampoo/soap products since hotels routinely provide complimentary sample size bottles.

Next a bottle with a decent sized opening facilitates cleaning and refilling the container. What's "decent sized"? Let's say, big enough to stick a finger, brush or funnel in. And I've found the ability to go "hands free" a desireable feature. Usually this means just placing the bottle down on a shelf or the edge of the tub, but if there is no flat edge or shelf handy? what if you're in a portable or rudimentary shower or out in the woods somewhere? I've found that a hole, grommet, or loop shape moulded into the bottle itself makes it convenient for attaching a nice waterproof lanyard, the ol' "soap on a rope" trick. The bottle hangs conveniently around the neck, no slipping out of the hands, no mislaying it in a shower of unfamiliar configuration with soap in the eyes. Additionally, since it hangs cap down, the product is pools by gravity toward the bottom where it is ready to be dispensed.

The bottle itself should be soft, pliable yet durable plastic, like PVC. This allows the contents to easily be squirted out and it should last for many refillings without cracking or splitting. It also allows for any air space to be squeezed out prior to altitude changes or airflights so you don't have messy explosions. Additionally, the bottle should be a clear (or cloudy transparent) plastic which allows ready visual confirmation of how much product is dispensed and how much is left. It may also help TSA inspectors identify the product.

Possibly the most critical component is the cap. It should be made of a flexible non-shattering plastic. It should screw on tightly and not leak spontaneously even when jostled around or subject to pressure changes. The cap must be operable (openable and closeable) with one hand. The hinge of this cap must be hardy i.e. it should not be prone to break/detach from plastic fatigue after repeated use. Ideally, it will have a secondary nipple and valve like aperture which prevents overspill and leakage when soap is dispensed. A standard diameter and threading may also eventually be a desireable feature so that if the cap hinge (the weak point in this entire system) wears out, you can easily replace it with a similar cap from another bottle (like I found a certain sunscreen cap fits on my bottle).

What I choose to fill my bottle with, after much trial and error, is one of those new 3 in 1 products, like Pert Plus for Men, and/or Irish Spring Hair and Body (with Conditioner). These are shampoo, conditioner and body wash combined conveniently, I think, in one product. It saves time, it saves space, and most importantly, it works. My second choice is the biodegradeable camper's soap available at most surplus and outdoors stores (which is liquid all-purpose soap, for shampooing/bathing, for washing clothes and dishes). Beside being environmentally friendly, it has the advantage of being effective with sea water, which may be all there is in some survival situations. The downside is, camper's soap is a terrible substitute for shampoo. It barely lathers and has no conditioner whatsoever. I have used these same camping soaps and the 3-1 products as dishwashing soap, in-sink hand laundry soap, foaming bubble bath, and emergency lubricant for slipping off stuck circlets.

Finally, I shall just mention that all of this (all these features) should be available for a reasonable price. Come on, this is not rocket science we're talking about. It's just a small waterproof bottle... period. There are some merchants/manufacturers that are selling small empty travel bottles for $5, $8... as much as $16 (!!!) each, and many of them don't even have half the desireable criteria that I have mentioned. I suppose if you are wealthy and money is no object, or if some big company or agency is footing the bill, then heck by all means, go ahead and buy these grossly over-priced products. But for the normal consumer, I just ask you to stop and think. Like, a TSA-compliant brand-named bottle of shampoo (filled with actual shampoo mind you) costs... what? 99 cents at Target? or FREE from a hotel? So why?! why would you even consider paying even $5 for an empty bottle unless there was some great added value in features. Really, I just shake my head in disbelief at what some people charge and what some people are willing to pay.

My current "best" solution happens to be a bottle of.... LOL... High School Musical logo Hand Sanitizer made by a company called Dr. Fresh that I found at the dollar store. It's basically a clear 3oz PVC bottle with a loop moulded into one end, and a nice one-hand flip-up cap. Almost perfect design. Additionally the bottle is filled with hand sanitizer, which is always handy in these days of "swine flu" hysteria, and, that's not all! It comes with a little aluminum carabiner clip which has myriad uses. Best of all, it costs, yes.... $1. I looked it up online and Dr. Fresh actually sells these for .67 cents per unit to these dollar stores. So let's do the math... an empty silicone Humangear GoToob from Amazon for $10 or a HSM PVC bottle filled with hand sanitizer and a bonus carabiner for $1.... hmmm.

Magic Bullets and the Riddle of Steel

"What matters is not the steel within the blade, but the steel within the man" -- from Conan the Barbarian

Ok. I'm just going to say it. With few exceptions and the unpredictable effect of plain blind luck, the type of bullet and the type gun really does not matter when it comes down to 99% of defensive shootouts. Once again, the ammo and weapon don't matter. They are merely the tool. What matters is the skill, condition, and will of the shooter (the tool user). Just as a talented artist, carpenter, musician, or chef even with inferior tools and materials, may yet create something superior to an untrained amateur, wannabe or hack, I'd bet a trained Navy SEAL even armed with an antique .31 calibre percussion cap black powder revolver would probably defeat a 14-year old Rwandan youth conscript with an AK-47 in a head to head shootout. I emphasized the will of the shooter also because no matter how well trained, well practiced, and well equipped a person is, there is always the final human element, that is, the willingness to take another human life. There are some who cannot, and there are still many others who will hesitate and freeze at the moment of decision. It's been said, "It's not the gun that kills, it's the cold, cold heart."


Through the years I've observed many different calibers of ammunition take their turn becoming the hottest, best thing to come around (like fads) and I've somewhat followed the reasoning and the science of these various calibres as they've come into popularity and evolved, mainly since the infamous 1986 Miami-FBI Shootout. I have tried many of the different calibres (.45 ACP, 9mm, 10mm, .41 Action Express, .40 S & W).


I don't necessarily want to discuss the pros, the cons and the history of specific ammunitions here. If you find that a certain weapon and ammo works for you, then great. Good luck. I went through a long 2 decade evolutionary journey myself and in the end, I came back full circle to 3 basic weapons calbres (tools) that I will recommend.

The .45 ACP handgun round, the 12-gauge shotgun shell, and 5.56mm NATO rifle round are three well-tested, dependable, versatile, and practical ammunitions that are very commonly available around the world. I mention this availability because those that choose weapons that fire uncommon, exotic or foreign rounds no matter how good or high tech they are may find difficulty with resupply.

As I mentioned earlier, a tiny .22LR pistol in the hands of someone that knows how to use it (an assassin) can be potentially as deadly as a .44 magnum in the hands of untrained novice (the dude who came out of the bathroom with the "hand cannon" in Pulp Fiction). I prefer the .45 ACP because of it's excellent first round stopping power, that is, a single hit from a .45 ACP causes enough shock and trauma to incapacitate a target. Due to it's wide diameter and relatively slow muzzle velocity, a .45 ACP tends to push a big conical wound cavity behind the point of entry, deforming fairly evenly, and rarely punching all the way through a body (making it safer for bystanders). The downside to the larger diameter round is that .45 ACP is heavy to carry, the pistols tend to be bulky, and it does take some practice to master.

I would usually carry only one spare mag (mostly due to the weight of .45 ACP) for defensive carry, in my offhand coat pocket. I figure if I can't extricate myself from a situation in 21 rounds (10 + 10 + 1) then I'm probably hosed anyway. When I know I'm heading for trouble (in the immortal words of Captain Malcom Reynolds when "I aim to misbehave"), that is, mission carry, I'll increase that to three spare mags (the one in the pocket, plus two in a mag holder on my belt).

When I purchase a new handgun, I always buy 6 new factory magazines with it (so a total of 7), planning on 4 mags for rotating use, and 3 for training use and abuse, marked with blue tape. "Real world" training means dropping mags on the fly (something to correct if you are still neatly collecting your brass, or catching your empty mag in your free hand to protect it like at the range). I load up my magazines differently according to my intended mission. Like, for hiking out in the boonies, my first round is always "snakeshot", just in case, or at home, it's Glasers so as not to penetrate walls. For general tactical use, I like the extra stopping power of any of the hollowpoints, especially Black Talon, Federal HydraShoks, and Winchester Silvertips. And, my third round in the magazine (therefore 3rd from the bottom)... is always a tracer, an Army technique... when I see or "feel" and hear (because it's a heavier load) the tracer go, then I know I have one more shot (one in the pipe, one in the mag) before a quick tactical reload with a round still in the chamber (and no magazine disconnect safety!). With a round in the chamber, I can still defend myself during the reload just in case, rather than being empty and helpless with the slide (obviously) locked back.


Now, as ubiquitous as they are on TV and movies, and as sexy and powerful as they seem to hold and fire, pistols are considered "sidearms" or back-up weapons by serious shooters, and they actually take some training, practice and skill to operate effectively. If you are one of those people that are now dismissively thinking, what can be so complicated? just point and shoot, right? then, you are exactly the type of person that will likely get shot in a gun battle. Unless you have the time to add a monthly "range practice" to your life, I don't recommend a handgun.


If you can only get 1 firearm, or if you don't have the time to regularly go to the range and practice, the firearm that I most recommend for defense is the 12-gauge shotgun. It really is the weapon of choice for easily making a hit at close (defensive) range regardless of skill level. Defensive range is statistically most likely to be 0 to 7 feet (under 2 metres). Except for some military situation, I can't think of many real defensive scenarios that would be require longer ranges. The shotgun is the weapon that almost anyone can point and shoot and be effective. A "double-aught" 00 shotgun round contains the eqivalent of 9 pistol bullets. So just imagine, with each pull of a shotgun trigger, 9 shots are sent down range in a deadly, gradually expanding conical pattern. The downside to the shotgun is that it does not have much of a maximum effect range, it's not specifically accurate, and both the weapon and the ammo are relatvely heavy. I recommend attaching "side saddles" and shell loops to the shotgun itself for immediate reloads, and then carry a few shotshell pouches with individual elastic loops for carrying almost a full shot shell box more.

Another great thing about 12-gauge shotgun ammo is the wide variety of regular and "exotic" rounds that are made for it. Beside being able to select shot sizes from the miniscule #12 (birdshot) to the "triple-aught" 000 and rifled saboted slugs, 12-gauge shotgun shooters can readily and legally get tracers, smoke, rubber shot, flechette, buck and ball, aerial flares, loud bird bombs, bean bags, and even non-lethal CS and lead powder (for blasting out door hinges).


I only mention the rifle round because in a disaster, survival or worst case scenario, there may be a variety of weapons readily available, the so-called "battlefield pick-ups". Again, I don't recommend untrained people trying to operate select fire military type rifles, but in the interests of information, I just stated that probably the best, most practical, and the most likely weapon calibre that you'd find are the 5.56mm NATO round, FMJ and the 7.62mm X 39 rifle round for the Kalashnikov. In the US, you might more often encounter the 5.56mm NATO. It is a rifle round well designed for accuracy, and 1st hit trauma. It's a "light" round for a rifle, so it has minimal recoil and lots of ammo can be carried. It's a high velocity round, so it has decent range and penetration (through walls and foliage). And when it enters tissue, it immediately starts to tumble end over end, causing a very deep, irregular wound channel that is both hard to track and hard to repair.

I personally prefer the new SS-109 "black tips" manufactured in Canada for good optimum performance. I stock that, in it's hermetically sealed MRE-thick bags, bandoliers and plastic stripper clips, as my "doomsday" (if TSHTF) ammunition stock.

A Portable Mini-Library

Usually a BOB might be too small to carry too many books. Books are both bulky and heavy, and unless it is some really useful reference, I would I carefully consider if the weight and space might be better used. Of course a book (normally a source of information) can always be a ready source of kindling, a journal or log for recording your adventure so that others may know what happened to you, a source of wood pulp for sustenance, and (gasp!) even an "emergency" source of.... TP.

Through the years however, I have accumulated a set of very small books, even smaller than a paperback, of useful, interesting, or classic tomes. I call it my survival library and I liken it to those small impractical luxury items that old 19th century explorers used to take with them on safari. Actually, most of them are really nice books, leatherbound, gold edges, with a ribbon bookmark. Still others are just plain useful, jam packed with charts, tables, diagrams, and statistics about the physical world. To me these books are entertaining to just study, maybe a good memory jogger for survivial projects I haven't thought of yet, and perhaps good resources for a practical/educational trivia game to pass the time.

The classic US Army Manual on Survival, Escape and Evasion, FM 25-76, is a valuable, practical, all around survival manual and a very good read. It distills the combined knowledge from decades of combined field experience into a very practical how-to manual for multi-wilderness survival.

Quite by accident, the primary copy of the Bible that I purchased for myself for my reference library happened to be this very small, pocket sized, red letter King James Version. I've been very satisfied with it.

I also fortuitously came across this beautiful leather bound World Atlas on sale at my local mall. I am a map collector, and I do possess many other maps and atlases, but this one had an elegant old-style appearance and a nice compact pocket size. The maps are a bit small and the scale too large for much fine detail, but it's a good basic collection of maps of the whole world.

How to Stay Alive in the Woods by Angier along with my ol' Boy Scout manual is the book that probably started it all for me. I picked up a small paperback copy at this out of the way mountaineering store in an industrial park in the mid-70s. It has an interesting tone, almost conversational, but it is chock full of useful, accurate information on survival techniques and strategies. It contains a lot of useful apocryphal information that the Army Manual does not include. Lately, a "new" rubber-bound edition of this book was published. I still keep this book at my bedside and read it just for pleasure.

I also have lots of those plastic coated reference cards for birds, wildflowers, clouds, stars, rocks/minerals, and animal tracks. These fit nicely in my field vest pocket and allows me to quickly look up the most common Western wildlife. I have larger "Field Guides" and specific reference manuals for each subject.

The Pocket Ref, 3rd edition is an amazing compilation of facts, tables, charts, conversions, and factoids from all the science, engineering, physics, mathematics and construction trade disciplines. Some describe it as a mini-encyclopedia or almanac. For me, it's like a little pocket cheat sheet so you don't have to memorize endless tables and formulas. The thing is, it's actually very practical and useful in the field. I highly recommend it. Seriously, check it out. http://www.amazon.com/Pocket-Ref-Thomas-J-Glover/dp/1885071337/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231948154&sr=1-1

Since it's inception in 1996, the Pocket Ref is now in it's 3rd printing, with even more information and updates that incorporate some of the latest discoveries. As far as I am aware, the 2002 3rd Edition is the latest version out right now. By comparison, the 2nd Edition had 542 pages. The 3rd Edition has 768 pages. I'm actually always on the lookout for good, compact books to add to my mini-book "library". Like I wished there was a Complete Works of William Shakespeare in compact form, or perhaps, my favourites Hamlet or A Midsummer Night's Dream.