Bushwalk Australia

I keep reading as an argument against lightweight walking that if stuck somewhere eg at a flood creek crossing and not having some extra food for a day or two is very dangerous eg: might require emergency rescue.

I would like to argue that this is another traditional bushwalking myth.

Just how much spare food do you take on a walk? well this depends, if you are doing a 30 day walk on the South West coast of Tasmania where you could be regularly trapped by flooding rivers, then sometimes a week of extra food may not be enough but in reality while getting delayed for a day or two does happen, most of us very rarely get delayed for more than a few hours.

To put this into perspective, you have to ask? is going without food for a day or two going to harm us or require an emergency rescue, NO is my answer. In this land of plenty and obesity most of us are so used to pigging out that we think the world will end if we miss a meal.

You only have to watch some of the survival stories on TV and in books to see that people can survive weeks or even months without food. I am fairly skinny and recently for medical reasons I went 5 days without food and I am still alive.

Tony

Hi Tony,
I tend to agree with you to some extent, but it is important to note that if you are combining light weight gear with less food then you may be putting yourself at risk. I have touched on this before elsewhere - all very well having no food if you are warm and dry, but a very different and dangerous scenario if you are wet and/or cold. One of the important factors in getting hypothermia is lack of energy, so if you have left out your warmest sleeping bag in favour of a lightweight one and you have run out of energy/food it's a bit risky but not necessarily going to kill you, unless of course it snows in the middle of summer (who would worry about that in Tassie?!!). Personally I generally finish a walk with at least one extra meal and a bit of scroggin or muesli bar or two left in my bag. I also leave food and dry warm clothes in the car in case I've run out. Maybe we're usually being overly careful, but being skinny I find that I run out of energy quickly and get cold easily. These will always be individual and endless arguments as people have different levels at which they are prepared to take risks and even how much discomfort they are willing or able to endure. The other thing is, if you are doing a difficult walk and you are like me and get a bit faint and stumble more if you have no food then it might be dangerous in that you might stumble in the wrong place and cause yourself an injury or worse I suppose. But then you might stumble less with a lighter pack too and use less energy, ah, the dilemma!

Although, as whiskeylover has pointed out, a day or two without food may exacerbate other problems like hypothermia or certain medical conditions, it won't kill you of itself.

Tony wrote:I keep reading as an argument against lightweight walking that if stuck somewhere eg at a flood creek crossing and not having some extra food for a day or two is very dangerous eg: might require emergency rescue.

I would like to argue that this is another traditional bushwalking myth.

I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was a 'traditional bushwalking myth'. Going without food, or eating inadequately can be dangerous, but the danger depends on the person and the circumstances. Water is critical, but a healthy well feed person won't starve to death while going without food for several days or even a week. However, there are lots of other problems that one may have to cope with and some of these will emerge after as little as one day without food. Without food people become irritable and lethargic. One will feel physically weaker. Moral will fall. Slowly the person will become more confused, will suffer from poor judgement and suffer from disorientation. As whiskeylover has pointed out, the immune system will be weakened, it will be harder to maintain body temperature, and hypothermia becomes a bigger danger. The longer you go without food the more likely you will need to contend with these problems.

In summary, a day or two without food won't kill you. However, if all alone in a cold, wet, remote area it could well increase the danger to an unacceptable level.

Tony wrote:To put this into perspective, you have to ask? is going without food for a day or two going to harm us or require an emergency rescue, NO is my answer. In this land of plenty and obesity most of us are so used to pigging out that we think the world will end if we miss a meal.

I'd tend to agree, a day or two should be find for most of us. However, everyone is different. It's hard to say how individuals will be affected.

Hi whiskeylover,

Thanks for your views.

First I am not saying to never take extra food, depending on the walk I am doing I sometimes take an extra days food, what I am trying to say is that if you do go a day or two without food that it is very unlikely to kill you or you will need emergency evacuation.

You are right if you are cold, wet and hungry it can be a very dangerous situation, I would also like to point out that just because you have lightweight gear it does not mean that you will be cold and wet. I would like to point out that even with traditional gear you can still get cold and wet, if anything if you believe some of what you read on bushwalk.com if you have traditional gear than you will not get cold and wet and I think that is a more dangerous situation than not having an extra day’s food.

I know SW Tasmania conditions need to be respected as are the conditions where I do most of my walking in the Kosciuszko NP, but I would like to point out that not everyone who reads this forum walks in SW Tasmania.

FYI, I always have a change of clothes in the car for when I get back to the car, but I am unable to see how this has anything to do with the extra food/lightweight vs traditional gear debate.

Tony

Lack of sleep will kill you before lack of food. For me, it's not a matter of dying but more a matter of being able to function.

A decade ago I was was training fairly intensely for 2 years with high hopes of getting into the SASR. I didn't find the physical part too hard after a week into the test but found that I was unable to function without food after just 2 days and collapsed. I had never been so knackered in my entire life.

On the otherhand, I can sit down with videogames and battle it out on Warcraft for 3 days without sleep! I only sleep 3-4 hours a night. My best mate would react the opposite.

What I learnt was that each person has different limits to their fasting tolerances. As for myself I am fairly comfortable for a day w/o food but will cease to function after 2 days being active. As a result I can't risk that happening and will always take extra food.

whiskeylover wrote: but it is important to note that if you are combining light weight gear with less food then you may be putting yourself at risk.

really? im sceptical of the 'fact' that lightweight gear increases risk... im sure that you can have warm and light gear just as much as you can have warm and heavy gear or crap quality heavy gear...

the "lightweight" factor does not increase risk. the human making the stupid decisions does.

I also think the effect of not having food varies with the individual. If you're lean and tired from a long trek you probably have lower reserves.

Lack of food may also cause you difficulties in concentration and physical effort. There are also strong psychological barriers to cross after missed mealtimes, even though we know that humans can and do last many days without any food at all.

Agree that this has absolutely nothing to do with lightweight gear choices.

Michael

im fine, i have enough reserves to be stuck out for a month or 3 without food, now that prior planning.....

on a serious note, having worked with remote area rescue teams i dont think being without food for a few days would qualify for a rescue, there are instances where it would, a diabetic walker with no food could be in serious trouble and to be honest you may not know you have it till your first collapse. so keeping a stash of emergency food supplies in your pack. I always have extra food (snickers bar, nuts, muesli bar and electrolyte sachets) in my pack as well as jelly beans in my first aid kit though i dont need them.

I think for the average healthy adult, that a day or even two, should not be dangerous. Undesirable, yes, but shouldn't be dangerous.

The Strollers with whom I regularely walk, are probably not the best example of very lightweight walkers. We are very concious of gear weight but due to most of our walks being above 1000m in Tassie in all seasons, we probably err on the heavier/comfort side of things.

Having said that, I dont mean 3kg tents and stuff like that, but we all run OP or similar canvas packs, and G/Tex coats in longer styles, that type of bit heavier than minimum gear.

The food thinking can be along these lines as well.On a recent stroll to Cathedral plateau, Tasmanian scallops were on the menu along with some nice wine.
I guess it comes down to personal preference but would think it unacceptable for this bunch to run out of food, but I'm sure it wouldn't too much other than some hunger pains. But dangerous, no, I think not. And going lightweight's good, if you've got the right gear, no probs.

Macca81 wrote:

whiskeylover wrote: but it is important to note that if you are combining light weight gear with less food then you may be putting yourself at risk.

really? im sceptical of the 'fact' that lightweight gear increases risk... im sure that you can have warm and light gear just as much as you can have warm and heavy gear or crap quality heavy gear...

the "lightweight" factor does not increase risk. the human making the stupid decisions does.

I think that in this case, whiskeylover was referring to a particular situation, rather than lightweight gear in general. In this case, having hypothermia and a sleeping bag that is less warm is a serious risk. Of course, this more a problem with the person who brought an inadequate sleeping bag, rather than simply the weight of the bag alone.

Tony wrote:I keep reading as an argument against lightweight walking that if stuck somewhere eg at a flood creek crossing and not having some extra food for a day or two is very dangerous eg: might require emergency rescue.

I would like to argue that this is another traditional bushwalking myth.

I have not actually seen people use such an argument against lightweight walking. I have seen people argue that it is a good idea to take enough food to cater for more days than the intended walking schedule, but not in such a way as to argue against light weight walking.

I'm guessing that this post may have been prompted by a recent comment of mine on another topic. If so, I was certainly not using it as an argument against light weight walking, but was merely explaining why I personally think it's a good idea to take emergency rations of food on long walks.

I don't consider the dangers of having insufficient food while on an extended bushwalk to be a myth, but then we would have to firstly come to some consensus of what "insufficient food" and "dangerous" means to see if there is actually any contention here. I agree that it's very unlikely that being two days short of food due to a river being flooded and requiring waiting for two days longer than planned would require rescue. However, it does increase other risks - less food means less energy to expend, means slower walking, which in turn means more days, and even less food per day, greater exhaustion, etc. A 3rd or 4th day without food would be even more of a problem.

I know from personal experience a small degree of how debilitating it can be to suffer from lack of food-provided blood sugars. However, as many have suggested, it is one of those things that varies between individuals, and different people's metabolism, and a variety of other factors. And again, it is a personal choice of weighing up risk and comfort against other priorities. Some may prefer to risk the (admittedly unlikely) event of running out of food for a couple of days on a delayed bushwalk, while others would prefer to cater for such an event. Neither is entirely wrong, just different priorities.

I did one walk where it had been cold and wet for a few days, and went ahead of the rest of the group in order to get a hot lunch ready for them when they caught up to me. While cooking lunch (just boiling noodles) I began to feel very sick. I later collapsed (in the tent thankfully) and was unable to help out with the evening meal or anything else. Eventually I managed to get a good bit of food down, which revived me completely, and I continued walking for another 3 days out, and I was fine.

Now "danger" is a relative term. I don't think I was ever in danger of dying. However, I now know the feeling of low blood sugar and know how to deal with it immediately, and prevent the very debilitating symptoms that make it impossible to continue walking. I now realise that if I was to walk for any more than a day or so without food I would be in "danger" of becoming quite ill, and of not being able to walk at any substantial speed or distance each day. I would certainly be in danger of requiring additional days to walk out, due to the much slower walking pace required by lack of energy.

Of course most people I walk with don't have this problem, and would probably need to go without food for a lot longer than me before they had similar issues.

No, I am not diabetic.

In SW Tasmania, delays of two or more days are common enough to be prepared for. I've not had it happen to me yet, but I know of several people personally who have had it happen. If I did get delayed for 3 days, and I had no extra food, I know from experience that I'd be unlikely to be able to walk out. I'd rather carry the extra food (which weighs very little, really) than set off a beacon and require rescue.

Now how much to carry, is a personal choice based on how much risk people are willing to take, and on people's own abilities. For me, I always take a single "emergency ration" for any overnight walk, no matter how easy the walk is. It weighs little enough that it's negligible (to me), and means that I can happily spend and extra night or two out in the bush if I need to. For longer walks, I take more emergency rations (based loosely on one ration for every 3 or 4 days walk from the end of the track I will get at the furthest point, not on how many days the whole walk should take). So for a 12 day walk, I might take 3 emergency rations. Weighs very little indeed, but allows for a LOT of flexibility.

Note that my emergency rations are not a normal day's worth of food. I usually take 1/4 cup of rice, and a little fuel for each emergency ration. So for a long walk in SW Tas, the emergency rations I would be likely to carry would be about 1 cup of rice, and I would expect this to last me for up to 4 days, if necessary. Usually, this amount of food would last me for about 1 day (albeit a very culinarily dull day).

It is certainly right that it is possible to live for many days without eating anything at all. Some religions include 'fasting' for days (or even weeks) on end (although some of those 'fast' during the day, and feast at night). However, I doubt that many real fasters would be capable walking very far each day.

On the other hand, water is something that we cannot go without for long (a few days maybe? not sure).

I think it depends on how big the "Spare tire" you start with was/is; for most of us ( assuming no major underlying health problems) a few days without food will probably be good for us.

Doing without food and exercising moderately seems to switch on our bodies internal repair system

Moondog55 wrote:I think it depends on how big the "Spare tire" you start with was/is; for most of us ( assuming no major underlying health problems) a few days without food will probably be good for us.

Doing without food and exercising moderately seems to switch on our bodies internal repair system

Yes, it also depends on the type of walking required, and other environmental issues. I found that I had no problems walking the mostly up-hill from Kia Ora Hut to Pelion Gap with a full pack before breakfast (hot porridge for brekky at Pelion Gap was just wonderful that day). And yet on another much flatter day of walking, with a good breakfast and morning tea, I suffered terribly from low blood sugars by lunch time, when the weather had been very cold and wet for three days.

I wonder if I'd been wearing more clothing if it would have helped. I was walking slower than usual, most of the morning, because I was with a slower group, and then took off ahead at a faster pace than usual - I guess my body was shocked by the change of pace on that occasion. But I've felt the some problem coming on at other times (but never let it progress too far before eating, now that I understand what that sick feeling means). It's always been either when the weather has been very cold, or when I've not eaten for a few hours (or both).

I agree that this can be very weather dependent, I would not myself go with-out eating when above the snow line, but that low blood sugar feeling can be dealt with ( if conditions allow ) by slowing down and or resting for a short time, that said the fitter I am ( and this fluctuates wildly ) the less I tend to suffer from
LBS

On the other hand, a whole day without chocolate would probably cause my metabolism to go into shock.

I'm like that with coffee, Ah caffiene; the primary food group

I'm with ya Moondog ! CV

A couple of months ago me and my girlfriend tried fasting for 24 hours once a week.

Have lunch and then nothing to the next days lunch.

I was ok till about 9am the next day. I would then start to feel...'weird'....not quite with it...or up to speed in the head.
My vitality/energy was also down to maybe 30-40% of what it usually is (Im told I am a high energy person-high metabolism).
Morale was fine.

The girlfriend would feel nauseus that first night from about 8pm. She would sometimes vomit around 10pm or early the next morning.
Then she would be nauseus for the rest of the time and slightly irritable.

But we did survive....no deaths yet on the 24hour fasting front.

Would a day or two of no food put me in a bad spot requiring emergency extraction? Personally, I dont think so.

Also unless it was at the end of a walk and I had eaten everything, if required I would just ration some of the food I do have left, so at least I had something to keep the energy levels up.

It's certainly dangerous for other people - you should see me when I have a sugar crash. Grumpy!

ollster wrote:It's certainly dangerous for other people - you should see me when I have a sugar crash. Grumpy!

Lol. Why do you think I gave you half of my last rations on Sunday.

ILUVSWTAS wrote:

ollster wrote:It's certainly dangerous for other people - you should see me when I have a sugar crash. Grumpy!

Lol. Why do you think I gave you half of my last rations on Sunday.

Good plan sir!

After the talk of Vandiemans land, I was getting nervous about the way you were eyeing off my fillets

ILUVSWTAS wrote:After the talk of Vandiemans land, I was getting nervous about the way you were eyeing off my fillets

Too lean for me. I like a bit of marbling.

ollster wrote:

ILUVSWTAS wrote:After the talk of Vandiemans land, I was getting nervous about the way you were eyeing off my fillets

Too lean for me. I like a bit of marbling.

Lol. At least I know im right if it ever comes to that then!! MJD and Stu may be in trouble though..

Bit of a worry, must say that the Ollster was certainly looking hungry once we'd dragged him to the top of Tumble Tor.

Spare food: really depends on the walk and weather. I expect to have very little left after a two or three day walk that started with a good forecast - perhaps a cup of soup and some chocolate. Hmmm.... perhaps just the cup of soup. I tend to plan my chocolate eating in great detail and I am quite prepared to eat more than planned if I get ahead of schedule .

MJD wrote:Bit of a worry, must say that the Ollster was certainly looking hungry once we'd dragged him to the top of Tumble Tor.

I should've asked ILUV for more details... if I had've known we were doing a 24km day I would've been better prepped.

ollster wrote:

MJD wrote:Bit of a worry, must say that the Ollster was certainly looking hungry once we'd dragged him to the top of Tumble Tor.

I should've asked ILUV for more details... if I had've known we were doing a 24km day I would've been better prepped.

I sent you the map with the routes on it? Didnt you get it???

ILUVSWTAS wrote:
I sent you the map with the routes on it? Didnt you get it???

Dunno, I got around 604,000 emails last week, which is approximately one a second. Not your "fault" I could've pulled my finger out and actually measured the distances myself.

Popular lad.

Ah well it cleared the cobwebs out for ya anyway.