UpNorthica

So what to do when, after seven weeks alone in the wild, you’re out of food, out of energy and out of clarity? You put your distress call signal to use, be glad for a quick rescue — and you realize it’s okay to call that a happy ending.

Adventurer/documentarian Ed Wardle has done just that.

As the subject of his own survival experiment Alone in the Wild, Wardle had himself placed in western Canada’s wilderness with his film equipment and little else. His goal: Three months. His tools: Sharp wits and his skills as an outdoorsman (though his bio is clear that he is not a survival expert.) His only lifeline: Weekly videotape deliveries to a drop-off site, and daily ‘I’m still alive’ tweets.

But as Wardle’s situation became more desperate, those tweets became less and less coherent. Followers of the program noted this, and not long after, with five weeks remaining, he thankfully bowed out and was rescued.

Sadly, some broadcasters are facing criticism for putting Wardle in danger “apparently unprepared, to entertain viewers.” Wasn’t that the whole point? When celebrity experts like Bear Grylls are caught hotel-hopping, isn’t it time for a reality check? For a look at how the everyman would do in a survival situation?

I can’t fault the guy. How long can you go on eating porcupine anyhow? It was a fascinating, brave and noble experiment. He gained a wealth of experience, learned volumes about nature and himself, and got out alive. That’s a win, in my book. His last post reads:

IWENT OUT THERE TO C IF I COULD LIVE IN THE WILD.IT WAS THE HARDEST THING IVE EVER DONE AND THE BEST.I DID SMTHNG XTRODINARY&I LIVD MY DREAM

Hats off to you, Ed. You’ve walked away with the finest of trophies: an unbroken spirit.