"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.

"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.

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.

"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.

"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.

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

"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.

"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?

"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.

"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.

In article ,
wrote:

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

Otherwise you'd've had a really great Arctic garden, eh? Ice-carrots
pulled from the soil & fresh-frozen blackberries right from the bushes --
if only it were enough calories.

The daily caloric intake for a fellow taking a dog team to Sitka would
make someone living in Jersey weigh 400 pounds within one year, but the
musher will lose weight chomping down whole sticks of butter as a major
part of a diet.

A temperate garden would not have to be large to feed a family (& some of
the neighbors to boot). When great-aunt Cora & I gardened what must have
been a mere half acre, what grew on that well-sunned land we couldn't give
away fast enough to be certain none went to waste. We dried foods & we
canned like crazy; we went years never buying veggies; we traded or gave
away bags & bags of stuff; we gave away canned stuff to whoever would
bring us a box of good jars. Even at that we ended up composting a great
deal of from the garden season by season, which always seemed a shame, but
it just overproduced food & there were only on average eight people to
feed on three adjoining properties. When we overestimated some crop by
factors of a hundred I had to find recipes that called for vast amounts of
garlics or radishes or zucinnis -- lord do I still love radishes baked in
coals, & fortunately garlics don't taste like garlic if you cook the hell
out of them so they make a pretty darned good soup. For some tubrous
things plus broccoli we could still be harvesting fresh in winter so it
was almost a year-round thing.

The only thing we could never quite get TOO much of was tomatoes, because
even making them a big priority by cold-pack canning scores of jars &
eating them off the vines like they were sweet apples, I loved the
cold-packed ones so much I used them up quickly in soups & stews & baked
things. Cold-pack canned tomatos are even better than fresh, there's no
way to duplicate that amazing taste without actually canning them
personally, then very hard to restrain oneself from using them immediately
instead of waiting until there's no more tomatos in the garden.

A honeybee hive would be nice to include as part of the garden, & a number
of berrying shrubs (not just summer fruits but bitter autumn berries too),
a hazel tree or two so one can press one's own oil. We had four Italian
plum trees -- can four trees worth of plums in just one year, you'll be
eating them for six years there's so many. One year we got so carried away
canning everything in sight that when we finally ran out we decided to
pickle watermelon rinds -- they were great pickled! When there was nothing
new growing to harvest, we were so addicted to the canning process that we
harvested crabapples from up & down the street & pickled those in the
prettiest jars -- they made great holiday gifts.

If I wanted to go all survivalist about it I already know from youthful
experimentation that earthworms, crickets, & snails are good eating -- so
the critters are also part of a garden harvest. No kidding about worms,
the only trick is to clean them properly, & really no stranger to eat than
clams & mussels, but with more uses, like they're good in muffins ("What
kind of berries are in this?"). As a vegetarian I'd be reluctant now; but
I don't think it's icky (to me eating cows is much ickier & eating pigs
unthinkable). I would also count as part of my harvest anything I could
get in walking distance right out of the wild (for a couple years "the
wild" for me meant harvesting from buildingless lots inner city).

In the countryside it's even easier, & not just blackberrying along
railroad tracks in summer. What you can do with a mudhole full of cattails
for might surprise many people -- cattail parts can stand in for potato,
flour, asparagus, & corn on the cob -- & that's just one of a couple
hundred things one can spot worthy of harvest. When I was eating mostly
only what my aunt & I grew, plus whatever I could harvest at odd moments
in the nearby woods, I was eating better than I do now that I mainly shop
in grocery stores, & cooking way better than now that I have a microwave.
I wasn't quite fully vegetarian back then though, so I did also eat
rabbits from time to time -- stewed, alder smoked, or fried -- & guinea
hens & chickens. No one could ever tempt me to eat redmeat again (not that
I'm dissing elk sausages), but sometimes I do get a hankerin' for alder
smoked rabbit which seems now to be a food of a bygone era & has taken on
a mythic immensity of flavorful greatness in my memory.

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/

(Tallgrass) wrote in message . com...
(Edgar S.) wrote in message . com...snipped

Even just a dozen tire stacks with home raised potatoes would be nice
to have and takes little effort.
snipped again

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

stack them up, fill with compost. As I understand it, u harvest the
spuds by removing one tire at a time. The tire stack saves space and
conserves water. Water evaporates off the stacks more slowly than it
does off the ground.

While the tires indeed would be ugly to look at out in the open, it
would not be too difficult to plant something in front of them... or
put them behind some kind of facade.... maybe a rammed earth wall in
front with access to the tire stack from the rear.

Having MULTIPLE dumped tires in my creekbed, I would love to find a
use for them, once I pull them up the ravine!

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

My father used his old 'fridge as a tool chest. It worked very well
and was handy. The shelves remained in place. The tool shop was very
neat.

In article , "Fran"
wrote:

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

[clips]

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".

And you've reinforced the truth of it. When you said you "hide" the tires
with other plants (such as rubarb, I'm sure that's a year-round disguise
of a wondrous sort) you pretty much admitted even you can tell that a
stack of tires in the yard still looks like garbage & needs to be hidden.
So you lack sufficient aesthetic to care; I'm not saying people SHOULDN'T
live like that, I'm just saying it takes trashoids to do so. But when I
make a planter, or a trellis, or any garden ornamentation, it doesn't need
to be hidden; if it slowly does vanish behind vines or shrubs, it wasn't
because it was butt-ugly & needed hiding. As you said "spuds don't care
where they grow" -- they certainly don't grow better because someone put
them inside some trashy tires. Get the trash out of the yard & the plants
will do just as well. Did you know old tires can leech enough zinc to kill
some plants? Used tires are an enormous hazard to the environment -- but
stacking them up in the gardens is not the answer to that problem.

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.

I know a great deal about recycling, but if you think keeping piles of
tires in the yard is comparable to municiple composts, then there's just
no easy communication between the earth I'm living on & your Tireland
residence on Alpha Centauri.

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.

Keeping garbage in your yard is NOT recycling -- no more than tossing
whiskey & beer bottles out your back window means they're "recycled" into
a lovely pile that bindweed can "hide" for a couple months out of the
year. Our household uses as little as possible of anything that even needs
to be thrown out or recycled by any means other than our own compost -- so
in our case we don't have the city cart off very much (our weekly garbage
pick-up is rarely more than a third full can, sometimes entirely empty, &
it's mildly annoying that those of us who DO NOT GENERATE much garbage
have to pay the same rates as people who cram their cans full every week,
most of it for a landfill). If you care about the environment, give up
your car & whatever else generates huge amounts of difficult-to-recycle
waste, but don't convince yourself that leaving parts of your car in the
garden & trying to hide it with rhubarb is ecofriendly. Eco is not spelled
u-g-l-y.

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.

A couple things are just not rationally deniable, such as anyone who lines
up "fancy" whiskey bottles of colored water in their window sills as
"decorations," or uses tires for planters in their garden, really are
going to be trash, even if most won't be able to know they're trash (or
they wouldn't've mistaken old tires for a garden decorations to begin
with). Some few are proud to be trash & good for them; if one's life is a
living satire & that person knows it, that's just about admirable. But for
most, the only question about the matter would be whether or not they are
even MORE pathetic by having painted their garbagy tires white to
"improve" the look. As well to stick little cocktail umbrellas in the
dog's turds never cleaned out of the lawn, to make those nice yard
decorations too. The only possible exception would be a garden
intentionally automobile oriented. I visited a garden decorated with
vintage gasoline pumps with lovely winding paths amidst beautiful shrubs.
Being aesethetic people they did NOT include tire planters nor even rusty
cars up on blocks -- but I could imagine how tires MIGHT have been used
in that context (in a satiric manner at least) given their collection of
gas-station kitsch & the gorgeous old gasoline pumps.

-paggers

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/

"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?