This is a spin-off from one of the field pistol threads; we were talking about bears and other wildlife there, but here I'd like to expand that to include a wider range of potential risks. The intent is to provide general guidance on how to assess risk prior to venturing out into the woods/fields/swamps etc, whether that's for a weekend hike in the backcountry or extended on the job field work. There are lots of folks on P-F who are very good at assessing urban risks, I'm guessing that knowledge is less widespread for the backcountry. There are certainly folks here who know much of this at a common sense level, for some I'm just trying to help organize that info.
My perspective is as a senior project manager for a global consulting firm, in that context we run a risk assessment prior to sending staff into the field for almost anything, these days. For me that can be biologists, geologists, engineers, construction managers, and more. We get into some pretty remote sites, NEPA baseline studies for mines deep in the desert as one example. What follows is based on 35+ years of experience all over the US and to a lesser extent internationally. At least some government agencies have a similar and sometimes more complicated process. I'm pretty certain that the more specialized .mil types have their own unique risk assessments, although I'm curious if/how the current iterations factor in environmental and wildlife risks when there are obviously greater conflict-related dangers present.
The next post summarizes a generic up-front risk assessment, we do a variation of this for almost anything out of the office. Even being familiar with the concepts can help one to avoid surprises, it's certainly not necessary to fill out a form for every walk in the local park. After that I'm thinking of running through wildlife risks by taxa; large mammal predators get most of the attention in recent threads on P-F, but smaller critters can be risks as well. At some point I'll offer examples of resources to look up info. And I'll probably run through region by region examples for at least the US, since the risks are dramatically different in the western mountains vs the midwest vs the southeast, for example. A regional approach also offers a chance to get into non-wildlife risks, since there are far more injuries or near misses from things like slips/trips/falls or weather than from all wildlife combined.
One goal is to help individuals ask the right questions when deciding which pistol/ammo or other gear to take in the field that day. Sometimes realizing that oh yeah, xyz is a potential risk on this particular day and location, can result in loading up with some different things.
This may evolve depending on feedback. Also if I assume you understand something and you don't, or if I get too deep into jargon, please don't hesitate to ask questions.