Imagine that you are lost in forest. The precise size and shape of the forest are known to you (maybe you have a map in your pocket,) but you have no idea where in the forest you are, nor do you have a compass or any other means of determining true directions. What strategy should you follow to escape from the forest along a path of minimum length? This problem, which may be of some interest to orienteers, trail runners, and others who occasionally find themselves lost in the woods, is surveyed in a recent edition of the American Mathematical Monthly. (The exact reference is: S.R. Finch and J.E. Wetzel, "Lost in a Forest", Amer. Math. Monthly 111(2004), 645-654.) It appears to have been posed originally by Richard Bellman in the 1940s. If the forest is finite in extent, as most forests are, then everybody knows a surefire way to get out: walk along a straight line and eventually you will reach an edge of the forest. In the worst possible case, you will have walked a distance equal to the "diameter". (Diameter can be defined for noncircular regions as the length of the longest line segment entirely contained within it.) In the case of circular forests this turns out to be the best strategy, and it also optimal for forests that are not too far from circular. (The technical term is "fat".) General results of this kind are surveyed in the first part of the article. The more interesting collection of results concern less symmetrical shapes. For example, consider a forest that is in the shape of an infinite strip that is everywhere exactly one mile wide. (If you don't like thinking about infinite strips, consider a sufficiently long one instead: once the strip is long enough it turns out that the best strategy is the same as for an infinite one.) Here, the strategy of walking in straight line might be very bad. If you happen to be walking parallel to the edges of the forest, or nearly so, you will have to walk a long time before you reach an edge. A better strategy would be to walk a bit more than a mile in a straight line, say two miles to be definite, and if you aren't out yet you can figure you are following a path that is nearly parallel to the edge. Thus, making a right angle turn and continuing in a straight line will get you out before long. (Exercise: figure out the farthest you would have to walk if you followed this strategy.) It turns out that a mile wide strip forest can always be escaped along a certain path approximately 2.278292 miles long. The path is shaped like a pair of calipers and is interesting for another reason: it the shortest path in the plane whose minimum width is equal to one. Less is known for other geometrical shapes, even very simple ones. For example, it is not known what the minimum escape length is for an equilateral triangle 1 mile on a side. Consult the article cited for references to other known results and conjectures.