Posted on 10/18/2013 11:32:37 AM PDT by marktwain
Bear meat— the feast of our Colonial forbears (bad pun), rich in protein and fats, like the bison. What a great read.
It’s terrifyingly dark at night there... It’s not exactly the Alaskan wild, but it’s the closest we can get in the upper midwest.
I’ve canoed and camped the BWCA a few times with only a hand ax for self defense. We camped on a small island so the chances of meeting a bear were slim to none. I’m a little surprised the author never mentions the shrill call of the loons at night.
“I’m a little surprised the author never mentions the shrill call of the loons at night.”
??
Just after dark, the cry of a loon was heard in the distance.
Guess I read it too quickly.
I hope you liked the story. I may read too quickly when I want to know what happens next.
outdoor ping
OK, what lake were they on?
The need to do so being replaced by the 416 Ruger that can be used in a standard sized action with better ballistics and being standard factory cartridge.
Does “Christian pulp savage” translate to Tonto or a Doc Savage type?
Still very much enjoyed the story. Interestingly, I just received this month’s Scientific American with a cover article of “Early Humans—Not Climate Change—Decimated Africa’s Large Carnivores”! The definition of a peak carnivore is a variable. Humans will be if they want to be, otherwise they are quite vulnerable. A wolverine can claim a kill because it will make it too difficult for a more powerful carnivore to take it! Still, as a rule bears dominate by size and strength.
As a geographer, I am still bemused by the “Northwest Angle” just to the west of this BWCA. The furthest north piece of the lower 48, it is only directly accessible by boat through the Lake of the Woods. A result of a bad map that was used to settle the northern borders at the Treaty of Paris in 1783, Ben Franklin & his British counterpart are either to credit or blame as the observer wishes!
Yes, I did like the story. Thanks for posting it.
Pulp savage is a term of endearment relating to occupation more than race. The group involved made much of their living harvesting pulpwood in areas of northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan, with crude chain saws and hand tools. A primary and interesting tool was the “spud” a sharpened curved blade made of a bit of automobile spring.
The “spud” was used to peel the bark from the pulp trees, which then brought a higher price at the mill.
A British PHD friend that I met in Panama once remarked to me that men and dogs are an unbeatable combination.
On reflection, I believe that he was correct.
I am of the opinion that the demise of the mega-fauna in North and South America was caused by the colonization of the Indians.
They enjoyed a golden age of a thousand years without war, with very little disease, and with the primary occupations/recreations of hunting stupid big game and raising large families.
Your humble correspondent is not privy to that bit of intelligence.
Oh really? My sense of that time period is that all these tribes were fighting more or less continuously in little border wars and skirmishes over territory and hunting rights.
I think that I agree with that 100% myself. While the end of the Paleolithic is marked at different times for different places, an average date of the Neolithic start is between 20 and 15,000 BC which is about the same date for canine domestication. The ability to share hunting and guard duties between the two species was, to me, as important as fire on the track to civilization.
I am of the opinion that the demise of the mega-fauna in North and South America was caused by the colonization of the Indians.
On this I do not currently think it is the sole answer. That man was the apex hunter of the time and was opportunistic and profligate in hunting, no argument. However the Megafauna were capable, diverse and in large populations. For me, the most likely shared villain of the die-off is the postulated North American impactor of 12,900 years ago. The acknowledged climate shift of the Younger Dryas along with a brief nuclear winter could share the blame for that loss.
“My sense of that time period is that all these tribes were fighting more or less continuously in little border wars and skirmishes over territory and hunting rights.”
Tribes fight pretty continuously, no doubt. However it takes time to increase the population and splinter it into tribes.
The latest information that I have read is that the population started with a very small group, perhaps 20-30 people that migrated down a narrow gap between the glacier. It would take a thousand years to build and fracture the population in numerous warring tribes. I could be wrong, but North and South America is a lot of territory to populate starting with only a couple of dozen people.
Even if we only leave it at 200 years, it would still be a golden age. I like the thousand year number. It has a ring to it.
glacier should be glaciers...
A live in editor would be nice..
Free editing for room and board? To bad that I travel a lot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.