Do You Think You Could Have Lived In The Wilderness?

WileECoyote · 04-03-2010, 08:35 PM

If you lived 100 years ago, could you have lived in the wilderness by yourself in order to be a trapper or hunter? I have been thinking about this and I really think I could have. I'm not all that big on company anyway and I think if I had my dogs and maybe had a wife, I could have done it.

grand · 04-03-2010, 10:41 PM

LOL! I couldn't do that. Maybe live a little farther from the rest but still within the community. It would be boring and dangerous to be alone.

Flowerchild · 04-03-2010, 11:47 PM

I don't think I could have. I guess we learn when born into it though. I know for certain my other half could. He is great in the woods.

descorpio · 04-05-2010, 03:20 PM

Since it's mentioned as a century ago, that period is not that much stuck back without any innovation or life style. It's was much evolved compared to many many centuries ago. There was this same type of television, football, baseball and the same kind of politics, entertainments, all available with much less fanfare. If forced to be living in a forest, then it could been a lifetime of opportunity to live a different life.

ramp · 04-05-2010, 11:49 PM

Well, I love to be outdoor in nature, but I don't think I can live alone in the wilderness. I like being a part of a community, getting wife and children.

Hilltopper · 04-06-2010, 10:28 PM

There is just no way I could have lived alone, out in the wilderness. Camping with my tent and sleeping bag is as rustic as I like to get.

northernbushape · 05-17-2010, 09:54 PM

I would have to say yes; there is a very high likelihood that I would have employed myself trapping, guiding, and hunting. As far as alone, probably not. I would have wanted a wife and kids and at least some neighbors within a few hours ride. I like solitude more than most, but I could not live like a hermit.

The Scout · 05-30-2010, 02:53 PM

I wouldn't care to do it 100 years ago, but probaly could with little trouble 2 or 3 hundred years ago.

BigBear · 06-07-2010, 10:39 PM

No, I think even 100 year ago, I would have chosen to live in the city. Even when we go camping, I tend to lean towards more modern conveniences available. Plus, I have to admit, I'm a big fan of indoor plumbing.

FernGully · 06-07-2010, 11:04 PM

I'd love it. Trapping, a little farming, fishing, just enough people to barter with. I would eventually want family with me. Of course, I'd have to be able to pick my spot.

04-03-2010, 08:35 PM	#1
WileECoyote Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 76	Do You Think You Could Have Lived In The Wilderness? If you lived 100 years ago, could you have lived in the wilderness by yourself in order to be a trapper or hunter? I have been thinking about this and I really think I could have. I'm not all that big on company anyway and I think if I had my dogs and maybe had a wife, I could have done it.

05-17-2010, 09:54 PM	#7
northernbushape The Jeepist Join Date: May 2010 Location: British Columbia Posts: 49	I would have to say yes; there is a very high likelihood that I would have employed myself trapping, guiding, and hunting. As far as alone, probably not. I would have wanted a wife and kids and at least some neighbors within a few hours ride. I like solitude more than most, but I could not live like a hermit. Oongawa

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-03-2010, 10:41 PM	#2
grand Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 57	LOL! I couldn't do that. Maybe live a little farther from the rest but still within the community. It would be boring and dangerous to be alone.

04-03-2010, 11:47 PM	#3
Flowerchild Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 43	I don't think I could have. I guess we learn when born into it though. I know for certain my other half could. He is great in the woods.

04-05-2010, 03:20 PM	#4
descorpio Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3	Since it's mentioned as a century ago, that period is not that much stuck back without any innovation or life style. It's was much evolved compared to many many centuries ago. There was this same type of television, football, baseball and the same kind of politics, entertainments, all available with much less fanfare. If forced to be living in a forest, then it could been a lifetime of opportunity to live a different life.

04-05-2010, 11:49 PM	#5
ramp Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 51	Well, I love to be outdoor in nature, but I don't think I can live alone in the wilderness. I like being a part of a community, getting wife and children.

04-06-2010, 10:28 PM	#6
Hilltopper Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 70	There is just no way I could have lived alone, out in the wilderness. Camping with my tent and sleeping bag is as rustic as I like to get.

05-30-2010, 02:53 PM	#8
The Scout Junior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 28	I wouldn't care to do it 100 years ago, but probaly could with little trouble 2 or 3 hundred years ago.

06-07-2010, 10:39 PM	#9
BigBear Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 9	No, I think even 100 year ago, I would have chosen to live in the city. Even when we go camping, I tend to lean towards more modern conveniences available. Plus, I have to admit, I'm a big fan of indoor plumbing.

06-07-2010, 11:04 PM	#10
FernGully Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 14	I'd love it. Trapping, a little farming, fishing, just enough people to barter with. I would eventually want family with me. Of course, I'd have to be able to pick my spot.