Which wilderness would be the "easiest" to survive in?

[SpyderEdgeForever]

Of all of the world's wilderness areas, which would be the easiest for a person with minimal tools such as knives and axes to survive in?

[MacLaren]

A Ranger buddy of mine really liked the jungle.
So much to eat and always warm.

[OldHoosier62]

As a grad of jungle survival training in Panama and the Philippines and Mountain and cold weather survival training..... Jungle all day, every day. Being cold, wet and hungry sucks. In the jungle you can find food, shelter and water in minutes with even a small amount of training.

[JD Spydo]

I think I would first start by putting this whole scenario in reverse. Take the guy we have seen on the TV reality show entitled "Survivorman" and his name is Les Stroud. He's one of the very few on many of those so-called survivor type shows that I personally believe has a large degree of credibility. So I'm going to go in reverse of what would be the "easiest" to trying to eliminate the most difficult survival environments. I've heard Mr. Les Stroud say point blank that two of his most difficult survival challenges were #1 The Kalihari Desert in Africa>> #2 He also said that when he was on an island above the arctic circle ( I think it was Baffin Island) he went on to say that both environments had extremely harsh living conditions and that food and fresh drinking water were both very difficult to come by in those places.

Personally I would also think that any of the desert islands in the tropics that lack a fresh water supply would also be extremely difficult to exist for any extended period of time. You can go several days without food but only about 3 days is the maximum with no fresh potable drinking water.

OK throw all that aside and realize what your primary needs are and where they are the most abundant. I'm actually thinking that a temperate forest like the forests we have here in the Missouri Ozarks provide great fresh water springs, Also with many lakes & streams to fish in as well as an abundant supply of wild game that can feasibly be hunted or trapped. But your two most important survival necessities are the ability to access safe drinking water and you ability to make fire by primitive means if necessary. So my guess is just about any temperate forest would be your ideal safe haven if things go extremely haywire.

[The Mastiff]

I've got to agree with Joe. The jungle has too many internal parasites, germs, virus, amoebas on up to some really hostile insects and snakes. It's too wet in places to get a fire going with old fashioned means and while biting flies and mosquitoes can be bad in temperate and boreal forests at certain times I'd still take either over jungles. The northern forests can be pretty scarce when it comes to food during winter when many species hibernate but I'd still take them over a tropical jungle. The temperate areas have even more abundant food than the colder northern forests so they would be an obvious choice.

Another area to consider would be the coast areas from Vancouver island up into Alaska. If you have the ability to fish you could survive pretty well there as long as you stayed at lower elevations. Lots of natural resources. The warm water currents that keep the area from icing up in winter and make the sea so productive bring plenty of moisture which builds up quickly in areas. 38 degrees f and raining at sea level change completely at 1500ft and above.

With clothing available I find it a lot easier to stay warm than to stay cool enough to be comfortable. Another thing to consider is some areas that seem perfect or to harsh may have areas of micro climates that can be perfect, or completely unlivable without modern technology. Rain shading from mountains or natural lakes with aquifers giving surface springs in otherwise dry areas are all things that can change the livability of an area.

Joe

[MacLaren]

If your talkin United States, then I believe the Blue Ridge and Smokey Mountains would be hard to beat.
A lot of springs- fresh water and game. The winters would be tough though. Especially in the higher elevations.

[JD Spydo]

If your talkin United States, then I believe the Blue Ridge and Smokey Mountains would be hard to beat.
A lot of springs- fresh water and game. The winters would be tough though. Especially in the higher elevations.

That's really interesting "MacLaren" because I've been to the Smokey Mountains on three different occasions and they are very similar to the Missouri Ozarks mountains that I recommended. We have a lot fresh water springs too in the Ozarks as well as a wide variety of game animals. Fishing is really decent throughout the state and overall resources are plentiful.

Yeah that is interesting because the two environments are very similar to one another. I will add a couple of other items to consider. I would stay out of Florida or any part of the extreme south part of the USA. Too many snakes, bad insects, a mosquito population that is almost scary, not to mention that the summers down south are for the most part are a preview of ****. I would also avoid any of the deserts here in the USA as well because deserts in the USA have all kinds of animals you want to avoid as well as fresh water supply being a huge problem. I like the Rocky Mountains and the forests in the northwest part of the USA but you better be prepared for vicious cold weather in those areas.

Also if you could live by a lake or preferably one of the big rivers close to a forest would be nice too because you would have access to a lot of resources that way.

Also in the mid part of the southern USA there are a lot of swamps and other places I would highly advise to avoid for so many reasons that it would take me an hour to list them all :eek: .

[ChrisinHove]

I've got to agree with Joe. The jungle has too many internal parasites, germs, virus, amoebas on up to some really hostile insects and snakes. It's too wet in places to get a fire going with old fashioned means and while biting flies and mosquitoes can be bad in temperate and boreal forests at certain times I'd still take either over jungles. The northern forests can be pretty scarce when it comes to food during winter when many species hibernate but I'd still take them over a tropical jungle. The temperate areas have even more abundant food than the colder northern forests so they would be an obvious choice.

Another area to consider would be the coast areas from Vancouver island up into Alaska. If you have the ability to fish you could survive pretty well there as long as you stayed at lower elevations. Lots of natural resources. The warm water currents that keep the area from icing up in winter and make the sea so productive bring plenty of moisture which builds up quickly in areas. 38 degrees f and raining at sea level change completely at 1500ft and above.

With clothing available I find it a lot easier to stay warm than to stay cool enough to be comfortable. Another thing to consider is some areas that seem perfect or to harsh may have areas of micro climates that can be perfect, or completely unlivable without modern technology. Rain shading from mountains or natural lakes with aquifers giving surface springs in otherwise dry areas are all things that can change the livability of an area.

Joe

These temperate rain forest areas supported the low-tech First Nation populations for centuries, maybe millennia. It was only incoming European culture that deemed their low impact and sustainable lifestyle undesirable. It is ironic (to say the least) that we now look at it in envy.

I guess the biggest issue is population density. An environment that can support a few 000’s will degrade under the weight of many times more.

[MacLaren]

If your talkin United States, then I believe the Blue Ridge and Smokey Mountains would be hard to beat.
A lot of springs- fresh water and game. The winters would be tough though. Especially in the higher elevations.

That's really interesting "MacLaren" because I've been to the Smokey Mountains on three different occasions and they are very similar to the Missouri Ozarks mountains that I recommended. We have a lot fresh water springs too in the Ozarks as well as a wide variety of game animals. Fishing is really decent throughout the state and overall resources are plentiful.

Yeah that is interesting because the two environments are very similar to one another. I will add a couple of other items to consider. I would stay out of Florida or any part of the extreme south part of the USA. Too many snakes, bad insects, a mosquito population that is almost scary, not to mention that the summers down south are for the most part are a preview of ****. I would also avoid any of the deserts here in the USA as well because deserts in the USA have all kinds of animals you want to avoid as well as fresh water supply being a huge problem. I like the Rocky Mountains and the forests in the northwest part of the USA but you better be prepared for vicious cold weather in those areas.

Also if you could live by a lake or preferably one of the big rivers close to a forest would be nice too because you would have access to a lot of resources that way.

Also in the mid part of the southern USA there are a lot of swamps and other places I would highly advise to avoid for so many reasons that it would take me an hour to list them all :eek: .

I figured the Ozarks, Blue Ridge and Smokies were a lot alike.
Very fine places to live in modern times as well
I live in the Blue Ridge, but am very, very close to the Smokies as well. Would love to see the Ozarks one day.

[Doc Dan]

Well, certainly there is a lot to be said about the jungle. There is food and water if you know where to look. I don't because I never had jungle training. I have had arctic training and I know for certain that would be very difficult. There is a reason the population is small, there. In the USA there was once a population of many millions of Native Americans. Disease wiped out all but maybe 300,000 or so. They were able to thrive and build cities. In most places it does not get too cold. Food is plentiful with a bit of planning ahead. However, if a person had to survive and started in winter, it would be hard.

[knivesandbooks]

The "urban jungle" isn't too bad :p

Cue "Welcome to the Jungle"

[MacLaren]

As a grad of jungle survival training in Panama and the Philippines and Mountain and cold weather survival training..... Jungle all day, every day. Being cold, wet and hungry sucks. In the jungle you can find food, shelter and water in minutes with even a small amount of training.

This^^^^^^

[The Mastiff]

These temperate rain forest areas supported the low-tech First Nation populations for centuries, maybe millennia. It was only incoming European culture that deemed their low impact and sustainable lifestyle undesirable. It is ironic (to say the least) that we now look at it in envy.

I guess the biggest issue is population density. An environment that can support a few 000’s will degrade under the weight of many times more.
Top

Excellent points.I'm not envious though. They were savage, brutal stone age people constantly at or preparing for war. Not at all like hollywood portrays them. There are perfectly understandable reasons animals and human tribal groups react so violently when defending their territory. When you are just surviving at your home territory you need everything there is to get by. A pride of lions won't share their areas food resources with infringing lions, leopards or hyenas and kill them on the spot. Humans are the same up to the point there are extra resources and even sometimes not then. :)

joe

[bearfacedkiller]

Probably whatever one you were the most familiar with.

[MacLaren]

I know one thing for sure.
Put me where its warm.
Cold weather is a stone cold killer.

[Tdog]

Provided there weren't too many others vying for the same space, Florida could be somewhat "easy." Plenty of fresh water, game, fish, and wild plants to consume. Indians always did pretty well here. The skeeters could present a problem. :D

[MacLaren]

Provided there weren't too many others vying for the same space, Florida could be somewhat "easy." Plenty of fresh water, game, fish, and wild plants to consume. Indians always did pretty well here. The skeeters could present a problem. :D

Lol, you ain't kiddin, those skeeters are a major p.i.t.a.!!

[Crux]

If your talkin United States, then I believe the Blue Ridge and Smokey Mountains would be hard to beat.
A lot of springs- fresh water and game. The winters would be tough though. Especially in the higher elevations.

Yeah, I think you have a point, but I think there are limited resources and you might possibly not want to live among crazy hillbillies. Plus we have tons of skitters and poison ivy, oak and sumac. Tons of snakes, spiders, and horse flies, which includes bears, cougars, coyotes and bats. Not to mention fire ants, brown recluses, black widows, yellow jackets, wasps, bees and really nasty puss caterpillars.

If that's not bad enough, copperheads, coral snakes, moccasins, rattlesnakes, cottonmouths and gators. Not to mention a LOT of really scary birds, frogs, squirrels and chipmunks.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[Crux]

If your talkin United States, then I believe the Blue Ridge and Smokey Mountains would be hard to beat.
A lot of springs- fresh water and game. The winters would be tough though. Especially in the higher elevations.

Yeah, I think you have a point, but I think there are limited resources and you might possibly not want to live among crazy hillbillies. Plus we have tons of skeeters and poison ivy, oak and sumac. Tons of snakes, spiders, and horse flies, which includes bears, cougars, coyotes and bats. Not to mention fire ants, brown recluses, black widows, yellow jackets, wasps, bees and really nasty puss caterpillars.

If that's not bad enough, copperheads, coral snakes, moccasins, rattlesnakes, cottonmouths and gators. Not to mention a LOT of really scary birds, frogs, squirrels and chipmunks.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[SG89]

The various wildnernesses one encounters on the Candyland gameboard... Peppermint Forest, Gumdrop Mountains, Molasses Swamp, Lollipop Woods... :D