into the wild


PDA






memphisjim
September 16, 2008, 05:16 AM
ive watched about 10 minutes thus far and he has some scoped rifle
what would you carry saying a few months out there
im sure plenty will say ak47 or sks
but for that weight you could have bolt rifle
or break open and a hand gun
remember however that germany was ill prepared for the soviet winter
ok so question what would you have in alaskan yukon territory
?
i wont accept a foldind stock ak47 and glock 10mm as your answer

If you enjoyed reading about "into the wild" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
theken206
September 16, 2008, 05:22 AM
kalashikov clone chambered in 7.62x39 and a 10mm pistol that alot of people hate :p

something capable of taking moose and grizz and the like as well as a .22 rifle of some sort

memphisjim
September 16, 2008, 05:29 AM
i hate how cheap and crude the stamped out ak47 feels pluss be care fullful chambering it youll cut your self on the safety
what about a bolt action 3006 and a ruger 10/22 both with the yet to be made carbonfiber stocks

memphisjim
September 16, 2008, 05:30 AM
oh the 7.62x39mm has taken every walking think in africa
but alaka yukon is tougher?

Loomis
September 16, 2008, 06:12 AM
Is this the movie where the guy goes to alaska on foot with only a 22 rimfire? And lives in an old junker school bus converted into a cabin?

I'd hafta say if on foot, I'd be thinking about something small and light, but not quite as light duty as a 22rimfire. I'd go with a keltec 223 folding rifle. Iron sights, no scope. And no pistol...too much weight to lug around.

memphisjim
September 16, 2008, 06:16 AM
loomis decent chose i suppose
would that be less weight vs ability than a tc contender with a coupla barrels?

AntiqueCollector
September 16, 2008, 10:50 AM
I'd want something that could take a bear out if needed. I'd not use 7.62X39, not powerful enough. A mosin-nagant could certainly take the cold climate up there, as to whether or not it would be enough, there's not going to be agreement on that. For a handgun, I'd take my Colt Walker.

357WheelGun
September 16, 2008, 10:55 AM
Mosin M91/30. Even if I run out of ammo it will still make a damn fine club. :P

SJgunguy24
September 16, 2008, 11:01 AM
Well if I can't use my Saiga 7.62X39. What about a Saiga .308?

hso
September 16, 2008, 11:07 AM
Finn M39

Tikka or Sako in 300.

mr.72
September 16, 2008, 11:18 AM
I hated that movie.

Anyway, remember you have to haul ammo as well. Given the primary purpose of a gun if you are "Tramping" like this educated idiot in the movie is to hunt game, I think a .22LR is the best choice pound for pound, including ammo. You can carry a lot more ammo in .22LR for the same weight as a larger caliber and .22LR kills rabbits and other small game just as well.

As for a self defense gun, I'd have to say a poly-frame, high-cap auto handgun and given ammo weight again, I would have to go with 9mm. A couple of hundred rounds of +P+, I wouldn't plan on killing a bear with it but short of that you are probably set and it's 1/2 the weight of .44mag. 1/2 the weight equals twice as many rounds in your pack. For a 15-18 round high-cap 9mm carrying the ammo in a couple of magazines makes it less to pack.

rc109a
September 16, 2008, 11:33 AM
What about a lever action in 357? Then a 22lr pistol.

Funderb
September 16, 2008, 11:37 AM
wow, the incredible skill of syntax, punctuation, and grammar in the first half of this thread boggles the mind.
I think memphisjim is drunk! :neener:

I would take a mosin M91/30. Mostly because I am confident with it. And a .22lr pistol. For the wee critters.

highorder
September 16, 2008, 11:45 AM
I hated that movie.

I don't know that it was to be loved or hated.

It was the true story of a young man that chose a path that led to his premature death.

We could spend all day on "what caliber for unprepared individialists?" but that doesn't change his situation.

Did those of you that hated the movie read the book? I suspect that most that didn't read the book were bored by the movie. The reluctant storyteller style that Krakauer uses in most of his work translated really well on film. I thought it was convienent and creative to exchange the sister's perspective for the narrarators.

Anyway, I would carry a levergun in .45-70 and a Springfield M6 in 22lr/.410

sargenv
September 16, 2008, 11:58 AM
I read the original article in I think Outdoor magazine then later the book that was made from the original article. So now there is a movie too? Well one good thing, it's not another "remake". I thought that guy was an idiot fromthe start. Initially he wasn't even going to bring a firearm. The one that he had, he had to give up when he went over the border to the south. I think it was a Colt or some kind of nice revolver. I do believe that whoever dropped him off before he headed to the bus insisted that he take the 22 he had.

I think if it were me, I'd bring some sort of lever gun and lots of whatever ammo I could bring. At least a 30-30. If I had my druthers, I'd also have some sort of shotgun, maybe one of the foldable 410's for small game. Ammo is light to carry and has enough punch for small game and birds.

One thing for sure, Nature teaches you Humility.. Muir and other explorers show you the romantic side of nature, but unfortunately you take an unprepared educated idiot into the wild and this kind of thing happens. If he'd been better prepared and had a map of the area, he'd have seen that there was a crossing basket about a half mile up from where he tried in vain to ford the river when he was all done with his "adventure" but before he poisoned himself with those seeds.

Colt46
September 16, 2008, 12:01 PM
Really capable of most big game in Alaska if you bring CorBon or Buffalo Bore.
Also, a .22 rimfire revolver or light rifle.

I read the book, but didn't see the film. A good read. I couldn't identify with the author's attempt to bring nobility to the young man who ended up dead in a sleeping bag in the back of an old school bus.
The kid was woefully unprepared and it cost his life.

mr.72
September 16, 2008, 12:06 PM
I don't know that it was to be loved or hated.

Even Sean Penn films are entertainment media.

The movie was boring, and painful to watch what was a foregone conclusion even if you hadn't read the book, which is the kid dies because he has no clue what he's doing.

Mr. Penn attempts to romanticize this lifestyle and make the sacrifice of one's life while trying to shun society a noble act, but it is in reality the revealing of a fool.

Kind of reminded me of "Grizzly Man", but at least that featured real documentary footage of a real insane man, and absolutely no judgment from the film maker (that must have been hard to do!).

JohnL2
September 16, 2008, 12:56 PM
Haven't seen the movie, but I will probably read the book by John Krakauer.
but unfortunately you take an unprepared educated idiot into the wild and this kind of thing happens.

So true. I think we here have all had fantasies about leaving it all behind and becoming mountain men.
I bet the movie focuses on what a romantic tragedy it was. Never get caught up in the "melodrama" of nature. It is all survival.
I like to throw off the trappings of urban life too now and then. But I plan to come back.
Be prepared. Be knowledgeable.

Eyesac
September 16, 2008, 02:11 PM
Yeah, I hated that movie too.

I'd go w/ a 30-06 bolty and a 10mm Glock :neener:

20nickels
September 16, 2008, 02:16 PM
.357 Levergun and matching S&W L frame Airweight revolver in same caliber. Same thing I would carry in the lower 48 wild.

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 02:22 PM
I rather liked the film. It's one of only a tiny, tiny handful of films set in Alaska to actually be FILMED here. The quality of the lighting and the nature of the scenery say "Alaska" to me, while 99% of the others say "British Columbia" or "soundstage."

Of course he was young and foolish. Most of us have been young and foolish. He was trying to escape everything, and he did.

MinnMooney
September 16, 2008, 02:24 PM
An accurate, scoped (w/iron sight backup), bolt rifle in a versatile caliber like .243Win., .270Win. or .30-06Sprgfld. with a sling. I'd bring a long-barreled (6" or more) revolver (more dependable) in a solid, proven caliber like .357Mag/.38Spec. so it, also, will be versatile. AND PLENTY OF AMMO !


Mr. 72 - was a foregone conclusion even if you hadn't read the book, which is the kid dies because he has no clue what he's doing.
What are you talkin' about? He was learning as he went and was doing a pretty darned good job at. He made one small mistake - which turns out to be huge. Give him some credit, he was young.







SPOILER ALERT !!

Don't read past this if you haven't seen the movie!

I felt bad at the end of the movie because after surviving in that harsh environment, he dies because of a look-alike plant.

GigaBuist
September 16, 2008, 02:41 PM
What are you talkin' about? He was learning as he went and was doing a pretty darned good job at. He made one small mistake - which turns out to be huge. Give him some credit, he was young.

Nope. He wasn't poisoned and he was losing weight as soon as he went off into the wilderness. It only took him 113 days to finally starve to death.

http://www.tifilms.com/wild/call_debunked.htm

Maplicito
September 16, 2008, 02:51 PM
Rather than picking my guns from the unlimited arsenal of the imagination, I'm just going to pick from what I actually own.

I would take my Ruger 10/22, and if I got to take a second gun, I'd either take my Tikka T3 Lite in .338 Win Mag, or my .303 British. The Bearanoid fool in me would want the T3, but the .303 has proven itself rugged for 91 years, and still is completely and utterly reliable, and has the advantage of tough iron sights instead of the Tikka's scope, so I'd probably opt for the .303.

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 04:06 PM
I can't be too critical of him because I nearly got killed homesteading off the Susitna. If I hadn't been on the road system that first winter I would have died. The heater burned the trailer out, so we had to ditch and go to a motel until I could repair the damage. When you leave the roads and transport, as he did, you make little things like that into really big things. Plus he had no idea how to prepare game. As the film shows he tried to "smoke" a moose by stuffing a fire in its gut.

20nickels
September 16, 2008, 04:17 PM
I enjoyed the film myself, but realized it for what it was, a story account of an event.
I as much as I would want to step up to a .41 or .44 mag lever/revolver combo carryweight is a serious issue. So .357 it is! I would however consider a .44 mag airweight 329PD (and many do) in combination with a 10/22.

nzsr
September 16, 2008, 04:37 PM
Like alot of people,I have visited the Bus that the young man died in.I carried a Rem870 with slugs and a .44magnum revolver.Thats alot of weaponry but the Bus is sadly fairly close to the road so you don't need much in the way of equipment.I saw alot of Bear sign but gladly no Bears during my night in there.I reccomend anyone to do a little research from the Book and find the Bus themselves,late fall would be a good time to go as the willows would have shed there leaves and make the bus alot easier to find.I walked past it several times before I noticed it,(its up a bank and you can just see the top of the Roof)

paintballdude902
September 16, 2008, 04:41 PM
that is one of my favorite books never saw the movie but loved the book

my older brother was very very popular back in high school he says he actually sat next to chris in some math class said he was odd but a nice guy

a bolt .30-06 with a low power scope and irons

then a 1911 colt .45


.....that was easy since thats what im taking in june to alaska

KiltedClaymore
September 16, 2008, 04:42 PM
a .45-70 leveraction and a .45LC SAA.

Funderb
September 16, 2008, 04:47 PM
I try to avoid being overly critical of the departed. It tends to resemble arguing with the dead.

762 shooter
September 16, 2008, 04:50 PM
The 45-70 and the 410/22 combo is hard to beat.

100 lbs and below......410/22.

101 lbs and above 45-70.

45 LC pistola would be smacking shiny,too

freedom lover
September 16, 2008, 05:51 PM
I'd probably take a 45-70 levergun and a .22lr revolver.

357WheelGun
September 16, 2008, 06:55 PM
I can't be too critical of him because I nearly got killed homesteading off the Susitna. If I hadn't been on the road system that first winter I would have died. The heater burned the trailer out, so we had to ditch and go to a motel until I could repair the damage. When you leave the roads and transport, as he did, you make little things like that into really big things. Plus he had no idea how to prepare game. As the film shows he tried to "smoke" a moose by stuffing a fire in its gut.

- He was within 0.25 miles of a cable bridge that would have gotten him over the river.
- There were 3 survival cabins within a few miles of the bus, filled with food and supplies.
- He deliberately chose not to bring either a compass or a map with him.

It's one thing to have something tragically unexpected happen, but the fact here is that a simple map would have allowed McCandless to literally walk out of his trouble.

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 07:19 PM
Maybe, but I know that country and if you don't know what you're doing you can VERY EASILY blunder right past a cabin or bridge. It's endless, trackless and unforgiving. Also I don't remember any mention of multiple cabins "within a few miles" of the bus. IIRC there were some in the general area, but you'd have to know exactly where to find them.

He was grossly unprepared. But then again most people who think they are prepared are still grossly unprepared for Alaska. The maps are often absurdly inaccurate and outdated. You can guarantee nothing out there other than risk.

KiltedClaymore
September 16, 2008, 07:30 PM
I try to avoid being overly critical of the departed. It tends to resemble arguing with the dead.

my .02 cents


i had to read this book for English 5-6AP last year, and it made me rather angry. now, im a pretty free spirit, and i can easily see myself adventuring around the wilderness like McCandless. however, his repeating critical survival mistakes turned me off the book. I dont remember what kind of training/wilderness experiance Chris had, but if he had it he failed to use it. Now as for myself, im an eagle scout with extensive wilderness survival training, a emergency medic (CPR and defibrillator certified), an experienced wilderness backpacker, and accomplished outdoorsman. to read how someone is glorified in a book for dying of stupidity (not acnolaging nature/hostile enviroments as the killers they are) makes me kinda angry! wandering into the ALASKAN wilderness (not really wilderness, being so close to the road) with only a .22lr rifle is suicide! heck, i take nature hikes here in arizona with bigger calibers than that! im not even going to mention other stupid moves on his part for fear i will give myself an aneurysm and die on my keyboard.

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 07:39 PM
not really wilderness, being so close to the road

You wander 100 yards off the main highway anywhere along there and you are in genuine wilderness. Break a leg and you can easily die of exposure right there, nobody will know.

There's no safety net, no backup, unless you provide it for yourself. He opted to go in light with no backup. Not terribly smart, but then again not that uncommon for someone taking a pretty short hike into the woods. He walked in real easy and he expected to walk out the same way, no problem. Why would he need a map? I understand his point of view on the subject. Of course he discovered, too late, that walking out was impossible after the river level rose. And while his survival skills were enough to keep him alive for a few months, he couldn't last long enough.

As far as his choice of arms, a .22 semi was enough to get by if he'd known more about how to prepare meat. He poached a moose but didn't know how to smoke it properly. There are so many "what ifs" with his story, viewed in hindsight. But ignoring hindsight and just seeing what he saw, I can see why a young kid with a good deal of arrogance and (he thought) plenty of "roughing it" experience would charge out into the woods here. Heck he probably figured he'd meet some hikers and would be able to get help in a worse case scenario. In the lower 48 that would have been true, but not where he was.

revjen45
September 16, 2008, 07:39 PM
M-N Mod 38. How did the bus get out there?

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 07:44 PM
Someone drove it out there during a dry part of the summer for use as a moose hunting shelter, IIRC. If he'd come later in the year he would have been helped by hunters. But he was there in early spring and mid-summer, when sportsmen are concentrated on the salmon runs elsewhere.

KiltedClaymore
September 16, 2008, 08:00 PM
You wander 100 yards off the main highway anywhere along there and you are in genuine wilderness. Break a leg and you can easily die of exposure right there, nobody will know.



i have been corrected! thank you for doing so! i had forgotten about something similar to the situation described in the above quote that once happened to me. i was hiking a thickly wooded valley bottom (about 5-7 miles away from the nearest vehicle access point) and ended up badly twisting my ankle after stepping into some critter's rather large (and deep) burrow. buddy system saved my butt (it really works folks!), keeping me from having to: A) hike rather far with a swollen ankle/foot, B) spend a VERY cold and damp night in the middle of no-where.


Someone drove it out there during a dry part of the summer for use as a moose hunting shelter

i remember reading about it being taken out there for use as a shelter by the construction workers building that road to no-place

Cosmoline
September 16, 2008, 08:09 PM
Whoever has the book handy can tell us for sure.

KiltedClaymore
September 16, 2008, 08:16 PM
i googled it. it was left behind by the Yutan Construction Company durring the construction of the Stampede Trail for use as a shelter (by workers as well as hunters and trappers). also found where the trail was going to. it was being built for easy access to an antimony mine owned by a guy named Earl Pilgrim.

highorder
September 16, 2008, 11:10 PM
Someone drove it out there during a dry part of the summer for use as a moose hunting shelter, IIRC.

According the the book, the bus was dragged out there by a big tracked earthmover.

Cosmoline
September 17, 2008, 12:02 AM
Thankee, that helps clarify it.

JCMAG
September 17, 2008, 12:50 AM
I've not seen the movie, but I've read the book.

My impression of McCandless was that he had a great discomfort with society, he was maladjusted, and largely an egomaniac.

But that does not diminish my respect for a man who is magnificently courageous in executing his desires, even though they may be crazy.

Let's not forget the years before he went to Alaska. Most people would have wimped out after a couple of months on the road and in the American landscape.

He decided to forgo materialism and he did just that. Perhaps we would all revere Thoreau just a little less if he didn't camp in his rich friend's back yard and mooched off his neighbors.

McCandless made a lot of mistakes, sure, but his courage extraordinary.

Funderb
September 17, 2008, 12:54 AM
+1 for the above.

ridata
September 17, 2008, 12:56 AM
- There were 3 survival cabins within a few miles of the bus, filled with food and supplies.

One one of the links in this thread, it says the cabins had been vandalized and the food was spoiled. He was possibly the one who vandalized them.

KiltedClaymore
September 17, 2008, 12:58 AM
yea that was a theory. some people speculate he vandalized them because he didn't like them (a symbol of civilization) being so close.

RancidSumo
September 17, 2008, 01:02 AM
I would take a 45/70 guide gun and a Walther P22. That a way I would have a small enough gun to take rabbits and a big enough gun to take Polar Bears and Brown Bears.

nzsr
September 17, 2008, 01:29 AM
You can just follow two Ruts from repeated Bulldozer traffic from years ago almost right to the Bus.People drive quadbikes there and the guys who found Chris nearly drove the whole way in pickup trucks.

Sad.

jordan1948
September 17, 2008, 01:35 AM
Aight now that I've read this I'ma have to read the book.

As far as firepower goes if I knew I was just gonna go out there and live off the land I'd have a winchester 94 rechambered for .500S&W, and a revolver to match with 4" barrel, instead of a .22 I'd take a take-down bow, eventually you are going to run out of ammo but with the time you have with ammo you can practice shooting and making arrows as well as heads

Run&Shoot
September 17, 2008, 01:43 AM
Probably my scoped Rem 700 .30-06 with its back up iron sights, and a Mk III .22lr.

Might even take my L-E #4 Mk 1 instead, for its rugged and protected front and rear peep sights. It would stand up to lots of rough use.

I would hope to make a few more friends of the locals I met along the way. The wilds are no place to snub a neighbor, even if they are 20 miles away.

Rubber_Duck
September 17, 2008, 02:08 AM
i hate how cheap and crude the stamped out ak47 feels pluss be care fullful chambering it youll cut your self on the safety
what about a bolt action 3006 and a ruger 10/22 both with the yet to be made carbonfiber stocks

Your grammar teacher must be spinning in her grave.


To answer the OP's question, I would carry a 7.62mm AK in the wilderness, assuming I'm going a few months without any maintenence while I'm there.

jhco
September 17, 2008, 09:58 AM
keep it simple
a big cliber handgun such as 44mag or 500s&w somthing that will kill a charging moose or bear, since i wont need a large rifle for game i would take 22 mag rifle for the hunting

the reason i dont want to take a big rifle is if i kill a moose or whatever it would go to was before i could eat it so i would stick to smaller game with a smaller caliber and just use the handgun for self defense against wild animals

357WheelGun
September 17, 2008, 10:16 AM
Maybe, but I know that country and if you don't know what you're doing you can VERY EASILY blunder right past a cabin or bridge. It's endless, trackless and unforgiving. Also I don't remember any mention of multiple cabins "within a few miles" of the bus. IIRC there were some in the general area, but you'd have to know exactly where to find them.

He was grossly unprepared. But then again most people who think they are prepared are still grossly unprepared for Alaska. The maps are often absurdly inaccurate and outdated. You can guarantee nothing out there other than risk.

No offense, but the fact that you do not remember a mention of the cabins does not change the fact that they existed. One cabin, clearly marked on topographical maps, was six miles due south of the bus in which he was living. Rangers and others who frequent the area have described the trip from the bus to that cabin as, "an easy day's walk". He was within a day's hike of at least 3 supply cabins.

Whether or not a map would have listed them correctly isn't the point. I'm certainly not attempting to imply that he would have definitely survived if he'd had one; merely pointing out that it seems odd to me that so many people lionize someone who quite clearly took absolutely no precautions and repeatedly refused advice from those more experienced than he. The person who dropped him off in the wilderness even went so far as to offer to drive McCandless to Ankorage, pay for proper survival gear, and then drive McCandless back to the drop-off point. The point here is that there's a difference between someone who takes precautions but still dies and someone who acts with a complete and utter disregard for his own well-being.

Risk is absolutely a certainty. It is certain in everything we do, and even moreso in the Alaskan bush. However, rational people attempt to mitigate that risk. McCandless did not. His death is a tragedy, but it is not the death of a hero or a martyr (I don't believe you are implying either, but there are many who do). McCandless was a clueless kid who ran into opportunity after opportunity after opportunity to mitigate risk and make proper arrangements, but steadfastly refused to do so.

What McCandless did was the equivalent of running out into a thunderstorm dressed in damp copper while standing at the top of the highest hill he could find and shouting "all gods are bastards". (Acknowledgment to Terry Pratchett for the metaphor.)

KiltedClaymore
September 17, 2008, 10:34 AM
357, i couldn't agree with you more

nzsr
September 17, 2008, 12:07 PM
I heard from more than once source that it wasn't the Berry's that finnished off Mr Mcandiss,it was a .22 from under the chin.

There is/was a cable over the river about four miles away from the Bus.I went in there in 2004,using a rock climbing harness and pully to cross the River.For Chris to have lived where he did for that long,and not have ranged at least as far as the Cable would have been strange indeed.Whe you are alone in the wilderness,Rivers,Streams,even Ponds becone like a freind.You vist then often.

Strange and sad ending to a young mans life.

ZeSpectre
September 17, 2008, 12:32 PM
What McCandless did was the equivalent of running out into a thunderstorm dressed in damp copper while standing at the top of the highest hill he could find and shouting "all gods are bastards". (Acknowledgment to Terry Pratchett for the metaphor.)

I don't disagree, but so what? He chose how he wanted to live and then did so. Freedom also means free to be stupid.

As for the firearm question, I'm with the .357 revolver and levergun combo. Preferably in Stainless with synthetic furniture.

mr.72
September 17, 2008, 01:26 PM
He chose how he wanted to live and then did so. Freedom also means free to be stupid.

I don't think anyone here has anything against a guy who made dumb, yet free, choices.

But the fact that the account of his life was distorted or romanticized, both in print and in film, in order to cast him as some kind of a hero is what is causing the heat.

JohnL2
September 17, 2008, 01:50 PM
He was where I was a long time ago. And I think a lot of young men with romantic wanderlust go through this. For most it was a phase. But for Chris it was a reality and he lived it, and was willing to pay with his life for his standards.
Does that make him a fool or a hero?




Maybe heros are fools. Fools with admirable standards.

One of Many
September 17, 2008, 02:06 PM
If we are asking what the best single firearm for a survival situation is, I would go with a combination rifle/shotgun in a center-fire cartridge and twelve gage version, similar to what Savage Arms used to market. A good aperture sight for the rifle barrel, and a mix of shot and slugs for the 12 gage, plus cartridges appropriate for mid sized game in the rifle.

Slugs would be good for close range defense against bears, and could also be used on moose if close enough. Shot shells for birds and small game, and the rifle for medium game at distances up to about two hundred yards.

The only real problem with that choice is that it only provides two shots before reloading, in case of bear attack. But then, few people will live long enough to get more than two shots off, if they do not drop the bear with the first two shots.

357WheelGun
September 17, 2008, 03:58 PM
He was where I was a long time ago. And I think a lot of young men with romantic wanderlust go through this. For most it was a phase. But for Chris it was a reality and he lived it, and was willing to pay with his life for his standards.
Does that make him a fool or a hero?

Maybe heros are fools. Fools with admirable standards.

At the risk of diverting further...

It makes him a fool.

A hero helps others without regard to himself. McCandless sought his own solace without regard to his loved ones. He was too caught up in his own life to see what he did to his parents and to his sister.

People who want to call him a hero or a martyr are people who want to legitimize their own youthful indiscretions. If McCandless is a hero, then their own foolishness can be excused as being some sort of heroic quest and they don't have to admit that they were too young to know better and made mistakes.

I'll not go further on this though, as I have already taken up too much of this thread on tangents. To the OP, I apologise.

And to get back to the topic at hand, I stand by my choice of a Mosin Nagant M91/30 for a rifle since it is virtually indestructible and ammo can be found cheaply. For a handgun, I think I'd want a double-action .44 Magnum revolver with a 6" or 8" barrel. Not great for small game, but it's not the small things I'm worried about.

Cosmoline
September 17, 2008, 04:02 PM
You can just follow two Ruts from repeated Bulldozer traffic from years ago almost right to the Bus.

Only when the river is low. "Supertramp" walked in easy and figured walking out would be easy too. Big mistake. But a very, very easy one to make up here.

McCandless was a clueless kid who ran into opportunity after opportunity after opportunity to mitigate risk and make proper arrangements, but steadfastly refused to do so.

Exactly, he was a clueless kid. I'm not in the habit of heaping blame on clueless kids. Esp. since I've BEEN one! LOL. There but for the grace of God go I, or anyone else who's seen the elephant. He took some risks, but I'm sure he didn't think he was leaving the safety net entirely. He was still on an old road, there was an old bus there. He knew the way out. Why would he need a map or a trip to Anchorage for gear? Once his supplies ran low he'd just walk right back out and hitch another ride down the road.

His mistakes were real, but they were also very easy to understand. Esp. for someone from outside who's used to roughing it on very different terms. He was already way underweight when he went out there, as a result of his lifestyle for the past months. By the time he got in a danger zone and tried to leave, it was too late. If you set foot on those waters you realize the insanity of any notion of swimming across. So he figures he'll wait it out a bit longer, and rely on berries and game. But he doesn't know enough about either to keep himself alive, and he dies. Once the body starts down that slope it's very difficult to recover even under the best of circumstances. He did all he could, but like so many others here he did not make it.

I would not call him a "hero" or a martyr. He's just one of the guys who saw the elephant and got stomped by it. Not the first, not the last. It can happen even to the very prepared.

physics
September 17, 2008, 04:54 PM
III. Counter to the portrayal in the Krakauer book and Penn film, Chris McCandless carried “into the wild” a wallet with multiple sources of identification and $300 in cash, as well as a map.
http://www.tifilms.com/wild/call_debunked.htm

Okay, so I haven't read the book, nor seen the movie, but I DID read that link above, and they say he had a map with him.

I would carry a large enough rifle to kill a bear, maybe a 7mm mag or something similar. I would also bring a .22 revolver, for small game. Weight would be a major issue for ammo considerations. I wouldn't bring a whole lot of ammo for the rifle, but would be able to haul a lot of .22lr.

spuscg
September 17, 2008, 05:09 PM
in the book he has a 22 bolt gun, completely stupid if you plan to hunt to survive

Cosmoline
September 17, 2008, 05:12 PM
He killed a moose with it, didn't he?

mr.72
September 17, 2008, 05:19 PM
At the risk of diverting further...

It makes him a fool.

A hero helps others without regard to himself. McCandless sought his own solace without regard to his loved ones. He was too caught up in his own life to see what he did to his parents and to his sister.

People who want to call him a hero or a martyr are people who want to legitimize their own youthful indiscretions. If McCandless is a hero, then their own foolishness can be excused as being some sort of heroic quest and they don't have to admit that they were too young to know better and made mistakes.

Right on 357!!

I will also point out, that this is arrogance and being self-centered at the core.

And furthermore I think people who want to legitimize this not only want to legitimize their own youthful mistakes, but they also want to affirm their own continuing in making the same mistakes. They don't consider these mistakes!

BTW about killing bears ... I have been watching reruns of season 1 of "Lost" and in one of the first few episodes some dude kills a charging polar bear with about 5 rounds from a Sig 9mm, and then fails to kill a dying man with one shot from the same gun. You just need magic bullets!

Funderb
September 17, 2008, 05:44 PM
Its easy to criticize the dead isn't it?

Let me be equally critical,

"Dale Earnhardt was a hero to many, and all he did was drive cars in a circle, and died doing it."

Not that either of the aforementioned peoples are my heroes, but before you start to flame away, think about it.

What makes them different?
Both can be seen as equally foolhardy, but did they not die doing what they loved?

***(slams nuke grade bunker door shut behind self.)***

Robusto
September 17, 2008, 05:54 PM
All right, I am coming in here late, but here is my take on it-

Disclaimer: I hated this movie and am not condemning nor condoning Chris or what this kid did.

First, what everyone here seems to forget is that he did not die because he chose to stay or because he couldn't read a map, or failed to bring enough gun. He died because he mistook a poisonous plant for an edible plant. From what I read (luckily not experienced) the plant that he ate causes intestinal cramps and fatigue so bad that one cannot physically move, never mind hike in Alaskan wilderness.

As far a weapons, I would not be caught dead (or alive for that matter) in Alaska with just a 22, but, remember, he lived off of small game; squirrels, small birds, etc. Try shooting a squirrel with an '06 or a 44 an see how much edible meat is left. The moose thing was probably a lack of knowledge, but then again, one person would have a heck of a time dressing out and preserving a moose with the proper equipment. Alone in the Alaskan Bush with minimal tools, I dont think that most of us would fair any better. I think that for "survival" purposes, a 10/22 would be your best bet for gathering food. That said, I would still want a 44 mag or a very stout loaded 45 Colt on my hip.

Also, this kid was an experienced outdoorsman, I just think that he seriously underestimated Alaska.

I am not defending him, just stating what I have read.

Cosmoline
September 17, 2008, 06:09 PM
He died because he mistook a poisonous plant for an edible plant.

That theory has been called into question, IIRC

jhco
September 30, 2008, 10:22 PM
just watched the movie and i think that his rifle was a remington nylon 66, am i right

KiltedClaymore
September 30, 2008, 10:39 PM
you are correct. it is also mentioned in the book as such.

Dirty Dawg
October 1, 2008, 12:52 AM
As far back as 1997, Dr. Thomas Clausen—the biochemist at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, who examined the wild potato plant (Hedysarum alpinum) for Jon Krakauer—concluded after exhaustive testing that no part of H. alpinum is toxic. Neither the roots nor the seeds. Accordingly, McCandless could not have poisoned himself in the way suggested by Krakauer in his 1996 book Into the Wild, and in every subsequent reprinting of the book over the next decade.


I think McCandless was young, nieve and to some degree foolish. I've spent enough time in harsh conditions to know that you can generally get away with going in light but not with going in unprepared. My experience in the outdoors has been that one small mistake leads to another, larger, mistake which leads to disaster.

I'd consider my .22 mag scoped with iron sights and a .45 Blackhawk.

akodo
October 1, 2008, 01:17 AM
oh the 7.62x39mm has taken every walking think in africa
but alaka yukon is tougher?

the standard technique for using a 7.62x39 vs an elephant is to unload a 30 round mag into it's side and then drive away/run away and wait for it to bleed to death

Aside from humane reasons, I don't think logiscically using 30 rounds vs an elephant or even 10 rounds vs a moose is as effective as a single shot of something bigger. Second, I don't think gutshooting and waiting for it to die works in the woods of the Yukon, where say a moose could in it's half hour of life swim out and drowned or dash off somewhere unrecoverable.

Nope, 338 winchester seems about right to me.

Alternatively, passing on the biggest animals and going with a .223 might be a good choice too.

Loomis
October 1, 2008, 01:35 AM
Ya well, the kid in that movie proved you wrong. He really did kill a moose with a 22 rimfire BOLT ACTION RIFLE! That should make anyone holding a 338 winchester look awfully silly.

Kind of Blued
October 1, 2008, 01:38 AM
No doubt about it, this:

http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/rem/rem_95659.jpg

If I could get one with a single shot .22LR barrel on top, I'd prefer that.

If you enjoyed reading about "into the wild" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!