These days the woods are full (no pun intended, but it’s inevitable) of bushcraft aficionados who insist that a four-inch bushcraft knife and a small axe are the only proper tools to use in the woods. Anybody carrying a big knife is a Rambo wannabe or else he has drunk the Busse Kool-Aid.
I beg to differ. Here’s a quote from the pamphlet Woodsmanship, which was published in 1945. The subject heading is Brushing, Page 60.
The camper’s preference in brush cutters is the trail knife—an oversized hunting knife with a 10-inch blade, carried in a sheath at the belt. This is really a combination knife and hand-axe, capable of cutting brush, felling saplings up to several inches in diameter, and splitting small firewood. These big knives bring to mind the still larger machete, of which there are endless patterns, but the typical machete is more effective on cane and other soft vegetation than on brush.
I would submit that the Busse Battle Mistress, the Swamp Rat Battle Rat, or the Scrap Yard Dogfather and Dogfather LE would qualify as modern versions of the old brush cutter’s trail knife. I’ve never handled a Battle Rat. I do own the BMCG, the Dogfather, and the Dogfather LE.
Horn Dog loves the Dogfather LE as a lightweight chopper and vine trimmer. I live in the Pacific Northwest, not in a swamp. So I think both versions of the Dogfather are just fine. In my opinion the BMCG is too heavy, even in my neck of the woods. Excess weight to carry, and unnecessarily tiring for long term chopping. I’m hoping that the Bushwacker will turn out to be the trail-knife that the BMCG should have been. A top quality, light weight, long trail knife, useful for many purposes in the woods.
I do hope it will come with the no-choil option. A ten-inch knife is too long for a choil to be a useful feature. All it accomplishes is to keep the near end of the blade far away from the grip, reducing the usefulness of that cutting edge for fine carving tasks.
Thanks, Implume. I LOVE THIS POST! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" /> Whether or not the reader agrees with the author's position, it makes a compelling case for the trail knife and stands in contrast to the Nessmuk trinity system of woodsmanship. I'm curious to know if the author feels that a trail knife is sufficient to handle all woodsmanship chores or if he believes a second, smaller knife is also needed for fine cutting tasks.
Woodcrafting is mostly advice aimed at the lumberjack or forest ranger, rather than the ultra light wilderness hiker.
Axe, froe and hand maul, beetle, wedge, brush hook, adze, two man crosscut saws, (AKA misery whips, don’t drag your feet ), hand brush hook, Pulaski’s, sawbucks and bucksaws, draw knife and shaving horse, barking spud and crooked knife, and yes, a smaller personal knife was carried. (Note that the quote refers to the trail knife as an oversized hunting knife.)
This was written in the days when old fashioned logging was a pragmatic business. Set up a camp, build a bunkhouse and tool shed and camp kitchen, make everything you can from the materials at hand. You had to, because labor was still cheaper than materials. Buying stuff cost the company money. The right tool for the job, without unnecessary ornature, was the rule.
I understand this way of thinking because I used to make my living in construction. By my day the work was high tech compared to working in the woods in the 1940’s. But the hard line pragmatism was identical.
