(Tallgrass) wrote:

It's not that hard to burn that many calories when using hand tools,
bucking bales, turning soil by hand, and especially if cutting lumber.

It was once a common topic on the misc.survivalism group....how many
acres would it take to grow a year's food and all that. The bottom
line was that if you plan *nothing but a veggan diet*, you pretty much
have resigned yourself to a slow death.

Most of our folks had heard or believed that it was possible to grow
enough food on an acre, but it never stood up to scrutiny.

I have a feeling I just started the argument again on these
cross-posted groups as well. You gardening folks have fun

We on ms had gone so far as to plan out and critique pretty much every
possible diet and analized the requirements vs the benefits etc and we
came out with, at most, two possible ones (nothing but grains and
beans etc) and dozens of proven impossible ones.

One person, using a minimum 3,000 cal a day diet (necessary to produce
those taters after all....gasoline engines don't last long in a
survival situation) would have to eat between 12-15 pounds of taters
per day depending on the type to get the necessary cals.

Of course, as that one fellow pointed out above, you won't be trying
to live on potatoes alone. We added spinach, onions, apples, corn,
beans, cabbage, lettuce, carrots, peas, squash etc etc etc in equal
amounts and in pretty much every case, the required poundage simply
went up. (We tried that menu above and it came out to approx
seventeen pounds a day if I recall correctly.)

""If you add corn to that diet of taters in equal proportions, you
come
out with a diet that consists of 17 large ears of corn and 13 potatoes
to make 3000 calories a day. Want to know how much that weighs?""

It's thus not a question of how much food you have to grow, it's a
question of how much food you have to eat and *NOBODY* can live by
eating fifteen pounds of veggies a day.

Right about now, someone on the gardening groups will be typing out an
irate "but my family did it during the Depression and I grew up just
fine". Problem is that their families, just like the Irish, the
Europeans, and the Russians (all limited diets) all survived by eating
massive amounts of fat. Why do you reckon fried foods were and are so
popular in the US? Why do you think the Russian moms will stand in
line for four hours to buy a pound of lard sold as "sausage"? Linda
H. hit that nail on the head.

ral

Most people will not eat all of that in carbohydrates, tho, but make
up a fair amount of those calories in animal fat. Bacon, butter,
gravy, lard used in cooking.

One can find caloric requirements of particular job types. It is very
interesting to read.

Linda H., M.D.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:34:07 -0600, "Bob Peterson"
said:


"North" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.


The problem is where do you get the fats? the nuts that think you can live
off a small garden are just dreaming. you can't do it without a lot of back
breaking work, and even then the diet is poor and you run the risk of health
problems from poor diet.

better to figure in a lot of animal protein and fat as a big chunk of your
diet. much easier than trying to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower every day.

A small garden, NO. A small farm, doable, however you are not going
work a 40/hr per week job and run a farm alone. With a spouce and kids
(helpers) maybe.

Anyone who would try to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower would be foolish,
but a 1 or 2 cup sized serving of cauliflower with butter and topped
with cheese would cover the CAL needs and be very tasty.

The reason I say that living off a small farm would be doable is:
A garden and livestock can provide enough food but is very hard work.
You would not be able to produce enough butter and cheese out of 3
goats, however you could with 10. You could not produce enough eggs
with 2 or 3 chickens, but you could with 20.
Its all in how you prepare your veggies as to the CAL count.
As far as potatoes, it would take 17 pounds of potatoes to meet to
2000 or so CALs needed for daily life, however you would only need 2
or 3 pounds of potatoes friedinfat to meet the same CAL count.

Another reason why I say a small farm is doable is because most
familys 100+ years ago lived soly off of the things they grew and
produced from their small farms.

Adding butter and cheese to veggies is the best way to increase the
CAL count, and its how the irish and others made it.

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.

Bob Peterson wrote:

"North" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?


Once you let your body aclimated to sub zero temps, your
metabolism
increases to the level of 4000 to 5000 calories a day just to
provide the heat to keep you warm

It is also common for infantrymen in the heat of battle to burn
4000
to 5000 calories a day.

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.

The problem is where do you get the fats? the nuts that think you can live
off a small garden are just dreaming. you can't do it without a lot of back
breaking work, and even then the diet is poor and you run the risk of health
problems from poor diet.

better to figure in a lot of animal protein and fat as a big chunk of your
diet. much easier than trying to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower every day.

The Independent

"North" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.


The problem is where do you get the fats? the nuts that think you can live
off a small garden are just dreaming. you can't do it without a lot of back
breaking work, and even then the diet is poor and you run the risk of health
problems from poor diet.

better to figure in a lot of animal protein and fat as a big chunk of your
diet. much easier than trying to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower every day.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:00:17 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote:


Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?
=======================
Obviously not the lard butt that sits on the computer all day. There are,
however, many occupations/activities that will burn off far more than 2000
calories in a days work or a few hours a day workouts.
That you are too lazy to actually work/exercise doesn't mean that others
are

Hummm anyone up to a bit of research? When I was working above the
arctic circle for an oil exploratation company, I was eating (2) 1
pound bags of Craft Carmel candies, and a 12pack of Coke, along with 4
large bologna and cheese sandwiches, every 10 hours. And was loosing
weight.

Anyone want to calculate how many calories I was consuming in those 8
hours? This of course did not count a big dinner at the end of the
day.

Gunner

"Guns aren't toys. They're for family protection, hunting dangerous or
delicious animals, and keeping the King of England out of your face."

-- Krusty the Clown, "The Simpsons"

"Tallgrass" wrote in message
(Edgar S.) wrote in message

Even just a dozen tire stacks with home raised potatoes

Tire stacks....what are these, adn how does one work with them?

Put a seed potato on the ground. Put a tyre (for those in the US, that
would be "tire" over it so that the seed potato sits in roughly the middle.
Through some old hay, some dirt, some autumn leaves, some compost, some
potting mix, some wilted weeds, some shredded paper mixed with some of the
previously mentioned or whatever organic material you have on hand into the
tyre (and stuff some into the cavity as well), water and wait for growth.
As the potato grows, add another tyre, add more organic matter, water, wait
for growth, add another tyre etc, etc.

At the end of the growing season when the stem has turned brown, or, prior
to that when you want "new potatoes", kick the stack apart, season the spuds
and store.

And a refrigerator....any suggestions, other than an aquarium?
Planter? Other?

As someone else has suggested, they make good smokers or if you dig a hole
and bury them on their backs with the door upward, they make good vegetable
"clamps".

Linda H.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:34:07 -0600, "Bob Peterson"
said:


"North" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.


The problem is where do you get the fats? the nuts that think you can live
off a small garden are just dreaming. you can't do it without a lot of back
breaking work, and even then the diet is poor and you run the risk of health
problems from poor diet.

better to figure in a lot of animal protein and fat as a big chunk of your
diet. much easier than trying to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower every day.

A small garden, NO. A small farm, doable, however you are not going
work a 40/hr per week job and run a farm alone. With a spouce and kids
(helpers) maybe.

Anyone who would try to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower would be foolish,
but a 1 or 2 cup sized serving of cauliflower with butter and topped
with cheese would cover the CAL needs and be very tasty.

The reason I say that living off a small farm would be doable is:
A garden and livestock can provide enough food but is very hard work.
You would not be able to produce enough butter and cheese out of 3
goats, however you could with 10. You could not produce enough eggs
with 2 or 3 chickens, but you could with 20.
Its all in how you prepare your veggies as to the CAL count.
As far as potatoes, it would take 17 pounds of potatoes to meet to
2000 or so CALs needed for daily life, however you would only need 2
or 3 pounds of potatoes friedinfat to meet the same CAL count.

Another reason why I say a small farm is doable is because most
familys 100+ years ago lived soly off of the things they grew and
produced from their small farms.

Adding butter and cheese to veggies is the best way to increase the
CAL count, and its how the irish and others made it.

"paghat" wrote in message
In article "Fran" wrote:

"paghat" wrote in message

You almost convinced me but then you created this image of the sort of
trashoids who have worn out tires stacked up in their yards as
planters --
no doubt lined up in front of the rusting vehicles up on blocks with
those
very tires removed, in front of a doublewide that's settling at an odd
angle with a roof that goes BANG! on hot days.

Boy, I don't think I've ever seen anyone drop so quickly into
stereotyping
about such a simple thing.

I've grown spuds in tyres and I live in a house that friends who live in
the
city think is quite posh.
So how often do you encounter this sort of thing? Or more to the point,
why
do you live in an area with such slummy places or go to such slummy
places?

Hey, YOU'RE the one who lives where it's "posh" to stack used tires in
your front yard.

You aren't reading what I wrote. I don't live where it is "posh" to grow
spuds in tyres. I live in a house which others have described as "posh". I
also happen to have grown potatoes in tyre stacks.

I don't put these tyre stacks in my front yard. The previous poster did not
mention growing spuds in tyres in his front yard either.

You are the one that assumes that anyone who DOES grow spuds in tyres is a
"trashoid".

Spuds don't care where they grow

The garbage dump wouldn't mind a few spuds either, or even some toxic
waste for that matter!

That comment is simply adding hysteria to stereotyping.

Just in case you aren't aware of it, many tips (or dumps) around the world
are now becoming very well cared for and have permananet tip attendants.
These tip attendants often shred garden waste dumped in the tip and then
compost it and either resell it to keen gardeners who know the value of
recycling green waste or reuse it on beautification schemes in the dump.

A tip about an hours drive from me has a huge recycling scheme using
earthworms to do the recycling and they make money from selling both
vermicompost and worms. It's a nice little earner that helps in keeping
local taxed down.

No one is compelling you to recycle anything but there is simply no call to
leap to the worst possible scenario simply because someone does try to make
use of discarded items. They do not become your "trashoids" simply because
they have discovered a good method to use for growing something in a tight
space. The trashoids are in your mind.

Bob Peterson wrote:

"North" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:10:31 GMT, KB9WFK said:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:50:33 GMT, (dstvns) wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:42:22 GMT, (Richard A.
Lewis) wrote:

On a 3,000-4,000cal diet, you'll need to eat approximately 12 pounds
of potatoes per day just to maintain your body weight. Add in the
artichokes, if they're of a comparable cal level as the taters, and
you got just over two days of food before you start starving.

Who the hell eats 4 thousand calories a day?


Once you let your body aclimated to sub zero temps, your
metabolism
increases to the level of 4000 to 5000 calories a day just to
provide the heat to keep you warm

It is also common for infantrymen in the heat of battle to burn
4000
to 5000 calories a day.

And of those that did, how many would try to get all of those calories
from a single food source like potatos? I just pray for their sake
that they don't try to raise a lone crop of Habanero peppers. I don't
know how many pounds of those you would have to choke down per day but
I think spontanious human combustion would be the result. :-)


There is a way to get your cals from taters and other veggies, simply
fry them in lard, or fat, even veggie oil.

Another way is to eat some taters with a hamburger.

By frying the veggies in fat, you change everything.

The problem is where do you get the fats? the nuts that think you can live
off a small garden are just dreaming. you can't do it without a lot of back
breaking work, and even then the diet is poor and you run the risk of health
problems from poor diet.

better to figure in a lot of animal protein and fat as a big chunk of your
diet. much easier than trying to eat 20 pounds of cauliflower every day.

The Independent

"George Cleveland" wrote in message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:11:46 +1100, "Fran"
wrote:

What I am objecting to is that both you and George are putting forward
information that was NOT in the original post (and Lord knows how off
beam
into realms of pure fantasy this thread has moved from the simple
question
originally asked!)

My observation that the "slant towards isolation is a bit worrying" comes
from this:
"This would involve one person living alone, in decent physical
condition, willing to do hard work and learn whatever is needed."

Yep, he sure did say that, but living alone does not equate with being a
"slant towards isolation". All he said was to give details of his personal
circumstances of being a person who will be "living alone".

I'm sure you will have heard in the news or on current affair programs, that
one of the the fastest growing households in the western world is that of
the single people dwelling. There are more now than ever before and it
looks like the trend is increasing. I know a lot of people in this
situation (and more the older I get) and none of them could be considered to
be at all isolationst. Some are happy to live alone and some are not and
are desperately seeking a partner, but isolationst?????? Most definitely
not. They simply live alone because of a lot of reasons. Don't chose to
share, don't need (financially) to share, have lost a partner to death or
from divorce or some other reason, but not isolationist at all.

I even know a couple of fellows who live the sort of (almost) self
sufficient life that the asker has in mind and they are both very happy to
live alone and do not seem to be even be seeking a partner - both long term
bachelors and likely to stay so, but good for any dinner party or drinks
party or even for a drop round and share coffee and a gossip session type
occasion.

You have put in what YOU think he will (or should perhaps) do BUT not
what
he specifically said.

As far as telling him what to do I didn't.

I know you didn't tell him what to do. I was adressing Richard in that
specific comment as that is to whom I was replying. I only objected to you
assuming that if someone says they will be "living alone" that you assume
they have a "slant towards isolation"

I don't have the info.

I agree :-)) hence my comment that you (and Richard) were making
assumptions.

I just
opined that it shouldn't take much land or time to be self sufficient in
food. Where I did go off into my own subjective world is when I assumed
his
motivations for doing it were similar to others I've known who've tried
comparable things. Some suceeded, some failed. But all were motivated by a
dissatisfaction with the way life is normally led in the "West". Perhaps
his motives are different.

Perhaps they are very different but at this stage we don't know and may
never know. He may just love the peace and quiet of his own land and have
the sort of personality that likes to do as much for themselves as they
possibly can because he may find it both interesting and fulfilling. On the
other hand, he may be barking mad and could end up taking pot shots at his
neighbours. We just don't have enough info to make those sorts of
judgements.

He did not mention that he would be doing the building. He may or he may
not but it cannot be read into what he wrote.

It is not unusual for people in both NZ or Aus to have even a fairly
traditional builder come in and build an off grid house that includes
items
like slow combustion cooking stoves (which also heat the hot water),
composting toilets, water collection from roofs etc etc. Even if one is
not
off grid, it is still quite common in rural areas to have electricity but
to
still use solid fuel for cooking water heating (for at least part of the
year) and tank (cistern) water for the whole of the year.

I grew up on a farm in Wisconsin that was just that way. With the
exception
of using ground water for tank water and outdoor privies for composting
toilet (eventually replaced by a home septic system).

I still partly live this way and I don't find it very arduous at all. I
have a septic system (although I grew up using an outdoor privy) and we use
ground water for flushing but tank (cistern) water for drinking and I use a
wood burning range in winter for hydronic heating, hot water and cooking.

With modern building techniques and good trades people it is very easy to
have the best that "old fashioned" living offered without the inconvenience
that our mothers put up with. I much prefer food cooked in (and on) a wood
stove as the taste is far better than the same recipe cooked in a gas or
electric oven. I don't know what the difference is but it is tangible.

"Tallgrass" wrote in message
(Edgar S.) wrote in message

Even just a dozen tire stacks with home raised potatoes

Tire stacks....what are these, adn how does one work with them?

Put a seed potato on the ground. Put a tyre (for those in the US, that
would be "tire" over it so that the seed potato sits in roughly the middle.
Through some old hay, some dirt, some autumn leaves, some compost, some
potting mix, some wilted weeds, some shredded paper mixed with some of the
previously mentioned or whatever organic material you have on hand into the
tyre (and stuff some into the cavity as well), water and wait for growth.
As the potato grows, add another tyre, add more organic matter, water, wait
for growth, add another tyre etc, etc.

At the end of the growing season when the stem has turned brown, or, prior
to that when you want "new potatoes", kick the stack apart, season the spuds
and store.

And a refrigerator....any suggestions, other than an aquarium?
Planter? Other?

As someone else has suggested, they make good smokers or if you dig a hole
and bury them on their backs with the door upward, they make good vegetable
"clamps".

Linda H.

"Tina Gibson" wrote in message
"Fran" wrote in message
"Tallgrass" wrote in message

hehe.....the ground must not freeze solid where you are!

No thank God! Heavy frosts only and that is bad enough. I'd migrate
rather
than live with frozen groudn or live in a place where fishing isn't
possible
all year round :-))

We live in the frozen north and fishing is possible all yr round - just
have
to cut through the ice to get there!!

I've read about ice fishing and it certainly wouldn't suit me. Fall asleep
and you could freeze to death! Snow and ice are wonderful if they occur one
day of the year. Months of the damned stuff and I'd go stir crazy and kill
someone.

I hate houses that only have a front and a back door - too claustrophobic
for me. I hate being confined by bad weather (too hot, too cold too wet)
and get outside as often as I can.

"paghat" wrote in message
In article "Fran" wrote:

"paghat" wrote in message

You almost convinced me but then you created this image of the sort of
trashoids who have worn out tires stacked up in their yards as
planters --
no doubt lined up in front of the rusting vehicles up on blocks with
those
very tires removed, in front of a doublewide that's settling at an odd
angle with a roof that goes BANG! on hot days.

Boy, I don't think I've ever seen anyone drop so quickly into
stereotyping
about such a simple thing.

I've grown spuds in tyres and I live in a house that friends who live in
the
city think is quite posh.
So how often do you encounter this sort of thing? Or more to the point,
why
do you live in an area with such slummy places or go to such slummy
places?

Hey, YOU'RE the one who lives where it's "posh" to stack used tires in
your front yard.

You aren't reading what I wrote. I don't live where it is "posh" to grow
spuds in tyres. I live in a house which others have described as "posh". I
also happen to have grown potatoes in tyre stacks.

I don't put these tyre stacks in my front yard. The previous poster did not
mention growing spuds in tyres in his front yard either.

You are the one that assumes that anyone who DOES grow spuds in tyres is a
"trashoid".

Spuds don't care where they grow

The garbage dump wouldn't mind a few spuds either, or even some toxic
waste for that matter!

That comment is simply adding hysteria to stereotyping.

Just in case you aren't aware of it, many tips (or dumps) around the world
are now becoming very well cared for and have permananet tip attendants.
These tip attendants often shred garden waste dumped in the tip and then
compost it and either resell it to keen gardeners who know the value of
recycling green waste or reuse it on beautification schemes in the dump.

A tip about an hours drive from me has a huge recycling scheme using
earthworms to do the recycling and they make money from selling both
vermicompost and worms. It's a nice little earner that helps in keeping
local taxed down.

No one is compelling you to recycle anything but there is simply no call to
leap to the worst possible scenario simply because someone does try to make
use of discarded items. They do not become your "trashoids" simply because
they have discovered a good method to use for growing something in a tight
space. The trashoids are in your mind.

"Richard A. Lewis" wrote in message

It was once a common topic on the misc.survivalism group....how many
acres would it take to grow a year's food and all that. The bottom
line was that if you plan *nothing but a veggan diet*, you pretty much
have resigned yourself to a slow death.

Most of our folks had heard or believed that it was possible to grow
enough food on an acre, but it never stood up to scrutiny.

I have a feeling I just started the argument again on these
cross-posted groups as well. You gardening folks have fun

Oh for Heavens sake! You are being patronising and heading off the track
into pure fantasy. Bucket asked about a self sufficient lifestyle. Bucket
did NOT ask about a vegan lifestyle or what the many froot loops at
misc.survivalism go on about when they congregate for a fantasy session.

The "gardening folks" understand very well what work is involved in food
production. Instead of simply chewing the fat and weaving the odd dream
about how they might get or produce food when it comes to a survival
situation, they actually do it (REGULARLY!!).

We on ms had gone so far as to plan out and critique pretty much every
possible diet and analized the requirements vs the benefits etc and we
came out with, at most, two possible ones (nothing but grains and
beans etc) and dozens of proven impossible ones.

That is it precisely - planning and critiquing but not doing anything about
producing food at all.

I remember once asking how many gardeners there were in misc.survivalism and
there were about 3 who admitted to it and a couple more who had had a garden
in the past but not now. AND if one reads the posts in misc.survivalism it
is clear that many have never been nearer to a food producing garden than a
Municipal Park. As for how many who have ever been on a farm or to an
abattoir or killed a hen then I think the mix of all those experiences would
drop the numbers to perhaps one or two at the most. And if one adds in
cooking or preserving...............

3 vegetable growers is an appalling figure for any group which aspires to
survive anything worse than a mosquito bite.

I stopped reading misc.survivalism some time back. Instead of finding a ng
which SHOULD be an interesting group (since "survival" involves so many
basic "homesteading skills"), it was a group dominated by a bunch of
deranged nutters of limited life experieinces but a huge dose of paranoia
and with a weapon fixation who tended to drown out the few who were worth
reading and who had some relevant experience.

One person, using a minimum 3,000 cal a day diet (necessary to produce
those taters after all....gasoline engines don't last long in a
survival situation) would have to eat between 12-15 pounds of taters
per day depending on the type to get the necessary cals.

Of course, as that one fellow pointed out above, you won't be trying
to live on potatoes alone. We added spinach, onions, apples, corn,
beans, cabbage, lettuce, carrots, peas, squash etc etc etc in equal
amounts and in pretty much every case, the required poundage simply
went up. (We tried that menu above and it came out to approx
seventeen pounds a day if I recall correctly.)

Given that small list of edibles there are clearly still very few gardeners
and no permaculturists who post to misc.survivalism even now!

Right about now, someone on the gardening groups will be typing out an
irate "but my family did it during the Depression and I grew up just
fine". Problem is that their families, just like the Irish, the
Europeans, and the Russians (all limited diets) all survived by eating
massive amounts of fat. Why do you reckon fried foods were and are so
popular in the US? Why do you think the Russian moms will stand in
line for four hours to buy a pound of lard sold as "sausage"? Linda
H. hit that nail on the head.

Bucket's original question said "I am willing to eat anything that is
healthy, preferably remaining vegetarian (although I am quite willing to
have chickens for eggs, and perhaps a goat for milk" and "I realise that the
yearly food yield will have to be spread out via preserving, canning, etc."

No mention of eating only spuds or even adding the odd cauliflower or bit of
corn. Fantasy can be fun at times but all you are doing is restricting the
topic to one hobby horse involving a restricted set of annual vegetables.

Bucket asked a much more broadly based question. He/she states PREFERABLY
vegetarian but since eggs and milk are included and it is only a
"preference" then why restrict it to only annual veg and exclude a wider
range of animals and perennial veg and tree crops?