Can I survive on wild food?

[Little John]

That implies to me that the "fraction" mentioned above is probably about 1/40: there is, on average, one acre of land per Brit.

Jesus wept, is that all there is?

Does that include crappy land that is unfit to grow stuff on?

[MrG]

That implies to me that the "fraction" mentioned above is probably about 1/40: there is, on average, one acre of land per Brit.

Jesus wept, is that all there is?

Does that include crappy land that is unfit to grow stuff on?

It includes all the towns and cities where there would be less wild food

[Little John]

That implies to me that the "fraction" mentioned above is probably about 1/40: there is, on average, one acre of land per Brit.

Jesus wept, is that all there is?

Does that include crappy land that is unfit to grow stuff on?

It includes all the towns and cities where there would be less wild food

So, the entire land mass then?

[lightbulblauren]

I agree with whats been said previously but am i right in saying We can't all live off wild food? referring to the stats stevecook172001 mentioned, because we as humans have malnipulated the landscape hear in the UK so that this is no longer possible. Although the population ratio landmass is differerent, in countries such as papa new guinea they have no choice but wild food and hunting and there not starving. Furthermore Wheat is 1/5 of the worlds calorie intake, which is farmed not wild. Does that make the idea of living off wild food slighty unrealistic or is it just me?

[Little John]

I agree with whats been said previously but am i right in saying We can't all live off wild food? referring to the stats stevecook172001 mentioned, because we as humans have malnipulated the landscape hear in the UK so that this is no longer possible. Although the population ratio landmass is differerent, in countries such as papa new guinea they have no choice but wild food and hunting and there not starving. Furthermore Wheat is 1/5 of the worlds calorie intake, which is farmed not wild. Does that make the idea of living off wild food slighty unrealistic or is it just me?

Living off wild food is entirely unrealistic for the population in totality. However, as long as the majority do not and as long as, for an individual, they personally have access to wild food, then it can make individual sense.

[Snail]

Yes, at certain times of the day and year, I can literally see dozens of rabbits (cost £4 now in the butchers!) running about. And loads of pigeons, sea-birds(edible?) etc. Wild plants too. I could live O.K. for a while if I became homeless and penniless.

But I'm always reading in the local press how poaching is increasing with fish in lochs and deer being targeted by organised gangs.

So, in a large crisis, I suspect that these gangs would quickly start poaching rabbits and anything else including even wild plants. It wouldn't take long for wild food to disappear.

[lightbulblauren]

In the case of a crisis, wouldn't be down the skill and knowledge of the land? Although the concept is interesting, imagining the world how it was thousands of years ago and the reality of how quickly that could resubmit into reality

[Little John]

Yes, at certain times of the day and year, I can literally see dozens of rabbits (cost £4 now in the butchers!) running about. And loads of pigeons, sea-birds(edible?) etc. Wild plants too. I could live O.K. for a while if I became homeless and penniless.

But I'm always reading in the local press how poaching is increasing with fish in lochs and deer being targeted by organised gangs.

So, in a large crisis, I suspect that these gangs would quickly start poaching rabbits and anything else including even wild plants. It wouldn't take long for wild food to disappear.

I've often wondered if it might make sense to get hold of an allotment where you can keep small animals (hens, rabbits etc) and then offer to mow and weed folks' gardens for nothing, then use this material to feed your rabbits for nothing. There may be a very hefty saving in the cost of meat to be had that way. You'd need an allotment that had free access to water for it to work, though.

[Snail]

stevecook:

I've often wondered if it might make sense to get hold of an allotment where you can keep small animals (hens, rabbits etc) and then offer to mow and weed folks' gardens for nothing, then use this material to feed your rabbits for nothing. There may be a very hefty saving in the cost of meat to be had that way. You'd need an allotment that had free access to water for it to work, though.

I don't see why not, although I know next-to-nothing about raising animals or even allotments if I'm honest. My granny used to keep animals in her tiny back-garden. Pigeons too I suppose could be kept. Anything that is small, easy to breed, and fast-growing I imagine.

Not to become self-sufficient but to have a regular supply of meat. Why not? I've just checked on the internet, and a webpage says 2 does and a buck can supply upto 50 offspring a year. Foraged food and 'waste' from people's gardens is free.

Good quality meat is already expensive now.

[UndercoverElephant]

sea-birds(edible?)

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Kilda,_Scotland

The farthest-flung inhabitable island in the British Isles was only inhabitable because the resident population ate the seabirds and their eggs. It is no longer inhabited, but the reason it was abandoned was not to do with running out of seabirds to eat.

So, in a large crisis, I suspect that these gangs would quickly start poaching rabbits and anything else including even wild plants. It wouldn't take long for wild food to disappear.

Depends how good you are at knowing what you can eat and how to find it...

[vtsnowedin]

Before the invention of agriculture the world population was about one million. With Roman agriculture and technology it rose to about 60 million. So if you went to just wild food including fishing all the seas after stocks recover and using current knowledge to not over harvest any game or plant population you probably still fall far short of one billion. If you think you are in the other six billion you better keep planting 30,000 corn seeds per acre and hope the fertilizer supply holds up.

[Little John]

Before the invention of agriculture the world population was about one million. With Roman agriculture and technology it rose to about 60 million. So if you went to just wild food including fishing all the seas after stocks recover and using current knowledge to not over harvest any game or plant population you probably still fall far short of one billion. If you think you are in the other six billion you better keep planting 30,000 corn seeds per acre and hope the fertilizer supply holds up.

Yes.

Which is why we are f***ed.

[Snail]

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Snail wrote:
sea-birds(edible?)


See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Kilda,_Scotland

The farthest-flung inhabitable island in the British Isles was only inhabitable because the resident population ate the seabirds and their eggs. It is no longer inhabited, but the reason it was abandoned was not to do with running out of seabirds to eat.

Seems kinda obvious now. For some reason I always thought eating seabirds gave you stomach pains! The UK's an island. Yet we don't seem fond of any food an island is good at providing: seaweed, winkles and the like, and seabirds. Go figure.

[UndercoverElephant]

We like cod...

[Snail]

Only with chips and usually hidden in batter. It's like mushrooms. All the stories I grew up reading associated mushrooms with the sidhe. Step into a faery ring and bad things will happen.

Now France and Italy, I think of as big mushroom-likers. The UK and Ireland, people view 'em as slightly dangerous I feel. Germany, I imagine the same although I don't know for sure.

I only had fish with chips growing up, and never a mushroom (although I eat them now).