Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not so sure that wild plants are going to be much of a resource. "Crafters" around here go after the ginseng and other plants of value, and would probably increase their foraging to food plants. The concept of foraging also implies access and possibly transportation to the area and back. City and suburban dwellers might find shotguns and worse facing them in any greater civil unrest. City dwellers would do themselves a favor to research and find out just how many uses many common landscaping plants and weeds have either edible or medicinal uses, including the roots/tubers of some.
Some foods can be stored, but the gut can rebel against major changes in diet or suddenly severely limited diets. (A problem for some non-vegans as well). A good arguement to begin incorporating some items into your diet now; both to determine if you can tolarate them digestively and if you can discover good ways to prepare them.
The global economy is partly designed to have nations incur severe disruptions in any major war. The laws of economics and inexpensive product production are not the same as the concepts of redundant and distributed sources for products. If a few drug manufacturies are "taken out" in a conflict, or key supplies cut off, there will be problems. The same can go for foods or farming equipment and so on. We are already seeing shortages in some drugs due to high expense and low profitablilty, especially for the treatment of less common diseases and future antibiotics.
While I agree that long-term global disasters are a kind of oxymoron, a country engaged in war may have that war drag on for three or more years. There are only so many dried beans that can be stored, on a practical basis.
A modern reference here would be the break-up of Yugoslavia.
Concern is that many people who are planning, may have incorportaed something in their plan that is counter to good prepardness.
You have those who's emergency food supplies are located in a single place that is itself subject to destruction. Yet they have no alternative skills or means to feed themselves.
Others place great emphasis on have their own means of growing their food, yet forget that in many scenerios, the ancillary needs (water, sunlight, no toxic contamination) can halt the production and render the land useless for a growing season.
Even something like depending on fuel powered machines, or a spucre to produce power can torpedo self suffciency big time when the saved fuel runs out or the power soucre can;t provide and there isn't any backup plans.
I know we can go carzy tryingt o cover all aspects but you would be surprised how many people's basic plans all hinges on an item that high on the disruption list by man made or natural causes. I would not plan on maintaining any lifestyle that depends on a resource that is, at best, questionable on it's ability to provide.
Even something like depending on fuel powered machines, or a spucre to produce power can torpedo self suffciency big time when the saved fuel runs out or the power soucre can;t provide and there isn't any backup plans.
This to me is a glaring error in strategy and a big waving red flag. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against electricity, tractors, freezers, etc, and their use. But when someone tells me they are "off grid," and power their freezers, kitchen, etc, via PV or wind, I kind of have to scratch my head. Yeah, they are not depending on grid electricity for that freezer full of the next six month's worth of meat, but they are still depending on that same technology powered via their own generating station. It's the same dependency with a shifted powering technology. Can a PV cell fail? Can a battery blow? Can a diesel generator run out of fuel? Can a wind turbine break down? Can your wiring fry somewhere along the circuit path? Can your freezer break down? Then you're in the same boat you were in with grid electricity. Again, don't get me wrong. Use this stuff if you like. But you've only eliminated the "outer shell" of your dependency. The dependency is still there. And yes, we will always be dependent on something. But once your meat is dried, smoked, etc, rather than frozen, it doesn't depend on that technology any more. Once your vegetables are in the root cellar, what's the likelihood that the root cellar will "fail" like powered cold storage can?
I'm not ridiculing anyone for any form of "prepping" they may take on using any technology they wish to use. It's all better than no preparation at all. I'm just saying it's something worth thinking about. You've read this kind of stuff out of me before, and you will again. I just see some advantage to low-tech solutions that have less of a dependence on means with a higher probability of failure. I guess it's mostly a probability game with me. For instance (hypothetical, here), what is the probability that my cooking hearth will fail to allow me to cook my food as compared to a gas stove or electric range? Well... unless I can't scrounge up some wood, or my dutch oven cracks, or the handle falls off the spider, or the crane falls off the hearth, or my entire cabin is wiped out, there really isn't much that can go wrong technologically. On the other hand with gas or electric, that's not fuel that is easily made by me or nearly as "fail-safe" in general as far as the technology is concerned. I have a dependency there with a certain probability of failure. And sure, the hearth cooking is certainly way more work and way more time consuming. But just looking at it from a probability of failure point of view, the hearth has the higher expected value (mathematically speaking). Of course, you've got to be willing to live like that, as well. And... you've got to be careful not to burn your house down.
I started the thread about Michael Bunker awhile back (and ruffled some feathers in doing so). He may be a religious fanatic in many of your eyes, but he has some very, very valid points (as far as I'm concerned) about the philosophy of what he calls "living off off-grid" (the extra "off" is not a typo) that I absolutely agree with. I generally call them "low-tech solutions." Most all of you know what they are, and most all of you can resort to them if you need to. I'm just more apt to implement (or attempt to implement) them as a regular part of my life, so that, for instance, if I'm left with no on-grid or off-grid power... well, that will be nothing out of the ordinary. I'm used to it. Of course, I'm not there yet. It's hard to break away from "the norm"! It's just the direction I'm moving... slowly.
There is no perfect solution, as I found out a few years ago when a bear broke into a friends root cellar and ate a years worth of supplies, and last year when my basement that I had been using for storage flooded from the heavy rains.
I agree, the low tech options have less to break, but they have inherent problems as well specific to their use, spoilage of short term items like butter, milk, cream and eggs for instance.
One way I am trying to improve on my alternate systems is to combine the old spring house and cellar by running fresh water, (gravity flow) through a concrete trough in the cellar that will both cool the ambient air, keep the dairy products cooler, and hopefully keep the vegetables longer. One problem is I will have to vent my cellar a little more aggresivly as the increased humidity can cause mold.
Natural gas for a stove or heating system isn't hard to produce from an Anerobic Digester and then filtering the methane through a filter to remove the Sulphur Dioxide and give you clean burning natural gas for cooking and heating or running a generator if you wish.
Sometimes finding wood or coal or even cow chips to burn may not be viable if you exhausted local sources or they have burned off in an wildfire or something and you have to haul your fuel a long ways.
Nothing is perfect, everybodies situation and options are different, and we cannot prep for every possible eventuality, and I like the Simple Is Best way of doing things, but that doesn't mean that new ideas can't be used to improve on old techniques.
The cast iron in your dutch oven was a big technological advancement over clay pottery which was a big advancement from using stones
In the city or suburbia even if they know what plants to eat, even if they plant a garden, water is going to be the number one concern.
If the system is so broken down that you are scrounging for plant matter to eat the public water supply has also stopped working.
The tap run dry.
I see a lot of desperate nomads looking for water.
but I'm sure this is not a new concern.
It may not rain enough for you to collect enough water for you, your family, garden or live stock.
and
How would city dwellers collect any and if they did the demand would out strip the supply.
In the city or suburbia even if they know what plants to eat, even if they plant a garden, water is going to be the number one concern.
If the system is so broken down that you are scrounging for plant matter to eat the public water supply has also stopped working.
The tap run dry.
I see a lot of desperate nomads looking for water.
but I'm sure this is not a new concern.
It may not rain enough for you to collect enough water for you, your family, garden or live stock.
and
How would city dwellers collect any and if they did the demand would out strip the supply.
If they don't have any water they won't get very far out of town.
Dietary concerns where you are alergic to some foods would make the job of feeding yourself infinately more difficult.
You can say that again!
DH has a few food allergies and we both have several sensitivities. Stocking our pantry and planning our gardens and livestock so that we get balanced nutrition longterm without making ourselves sick is a bit complicated. Foraging is likewise not always simple, especially since many people who have food and environmental allergies also have or develop multiple food allergies.
These things need to be considered. We can both eat the lamb meat and drink sheep's milk, but I'm the only one who can work with the live sheep because DH is allergic to lanolin in the wool. We can both eat rabbit and chicken meat, but he can't handle either animal alive and we have to limit how much egg white he eats. We can no-way-no-how ever have a horse to help us with the farm work because DH would puff up and die of anaphylaxis. He also has some pollen allergies and plant contact allergies, so gardening and foraging can cause problems as well.
So it's not just the food we preppers have to worry about, but also any allergies related to the procurement of it! Your plans have to include things like how many animals and plants can one person can realistically raise/grow and process BY THEMSELVES because others in their family are allergic, and whether that amount will be enough to maintain proper nutrition. Yeah, and don't forget those allergy labels on your home-canned foods!
Now - chosen lifestyle diets are an entirely different thing all-together. In a true long-term survival situation, I don't think people will be able to be so precious about what they're eating if they want to remain on this side of the dirt.
In the city or suburbia even if they know what plants to eat, even if they plant a garden, water is going to be the number one concern.
If the system is so broken down that you are scrounging for plant matter to eat the public water supply has also stopped working.
The tap run dry.
I see a lot of desperate nomads looking for water.
but I'm sure this is not a new concern.
It may not rain enough for you to collect enough water for you, your family, garden or live stock.
and
How would city dwellers collect any and if they did the demand would out strip the supply.
That is why the more populous Eastern US was settled east of the 100th meridian.
Thus, this line of longitude represented the boundary between the non-irrigated east and irrigation-necessary west.
Before irrigation they had this crazy religious nonsense that rain would follow the plow. God would make it rain. There was also the dust seeding the clouds pseudo science. It was actually because of a 20 year moist cycle that returned to the mean for a few dust bowls. It was the Mormons in Utah , no doubt inspired by what was essentially born as a desert religion , that were the irrigation experts. Finally in the 30s they made all the water projects.
If you store water in the Eastern US, you will have enough.
Thus, this line of longitude represented the boundary between the non-irrigated east and irrigation-necessary west.
Before irrigation they had this crazy religious nonsense that rain would follow the plow. God would make it rain. There was also the dust seeding the clouds pseudo science. It was actually because of a 20 year moist cycle that returned to the mean for a few dust bowls. It was the Mormons in Utah , no doubt inspired by what was essentially born as a desert religion , that were the irrigation experts. Finally in the 30s they made all the water projects.
If you store water in the Eastern US, you will have enough.
Some people will argue that it was not the religious nonsense (rain follows the plow) but the rotten business of trying to get more people to settle the (last) frontier. See, by the dust bowl of 1920s and 30s, most good land had been settled and the incoming stream of immigrants wanted to find land for themselves. The government (and quite a few corrupt land speculators) was quite happy to propagate the "rain behind the plow" nonsense in order to get people to settle places like the Texas Panhandle, for example. In fact a few towns like Dalhart, TX were based on a scam that portrayed the city as a thriving town with tree lined streets and water fountains (this is how it was sold to people in Europe and East USA). When people got off the train, it was a dust covered, crap hole. Anyways, the two land speculators connected to the scam ended up in jail but a lot of others did not.
You can read a lot more about what happened to the Panhandle, all the greed connected to ripping out all the grass and replacing it with wheat etc. in a very good book called "The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl". It's actually a great lesson in how human stupidity, greed and kick-the-can-down-the-road attitude can lead to disaster.
Kinda like today. Too bad we did not learn anything from it.
Finally, a lot of people have a romantic idea of our country's history. Hard working pioneers, honest men shaking hands to seal a deal (no paper contract necessary), fair-and-square attitude etc. In reality it was a merciless ongoing bloody place motivated by basic greed for land and money. Speculators, pyramid schemes, land fraud, other fraud, force, murder, it was all fair game and most of the wealth was built on it.
If someone wants to be an ethical vegan or vegetarian, I can understand that desire. However, this is a self-sufficiency and preparedness forum, not a "bash-the-chicken-eaters" forum.
So... in the interest of keeping the forum ON-TOPIC... what special needs do people with limited diets need to take to survive a SHTF situation?
Situation 1 - Stores closed for a week due to storm or other natural disaster.
Situation 2 - Extended (3 month) situation - lack of income, family issues, whatever.
Situation 3 - Major problem. Ummm, destruction of a nuke plant on the coast of Kalifornia contaminating much of the commercially grown organic foods for a year or more. Something along those lines or worse.
In special diets, there are other possible problems as well, what of people who must have insulin or thyroid medication, or other medications? With insurance requiring monthly refills, does that mean at month two, people start dying?
Again, I've no problem with the idea of ethical vegans or vegetarians, but since this is a SURVIVAL and SELF-SUFFICIENCY forum, and not a soap box for animal rights, I would hope that those posters have something CONSTRUCTIVE to add.
Umm, they'd need a garden which has a good mix of grains, veggies, and legumes in order to fill their basic food needs. That's about it. The exact mix can easily be found on just about any vegan website.
Personally, I think such a diet is dumb but I can at least admit that if one is serious about animal welfare then it is an ethical diet. Sure, it runs contrary to the whole history of human evolution and it makes nutrition much more difficult but it can be done. I just wouldn't pick it for myself as there are other excellent ways to deal with the ethical concerns without compromising diet as much. To each his own though.
BTW the whole "Kalifornia" crap detracts from your post and makes me take it a whole lot less seriously. It is obvious you were going off on a non sequitur though and doing exactly what you were whining about though (the off topic commentary you were complaining about).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And... you've got to be careful not to burn your house down. 
You can say that again!
