Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Babberney" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:34:12 -0600, "Bob Peterson" wrote: "North" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 14:11:23 -0600, "Bob Peterson" As for food, you really need reliable sources of protein. meat protein is the best (although vegans may argue with you on that). Well, I'm not a vegan, but as a vegetarian I definitely disagree with that. to produce meat, you have to feed the animal in question. ====================== Sure thing. Put that food into yourself and you get far more efficient use out of it. ===================== I don't think so. How much grass is in your diet? Animals can take completely inedible, to people, plant material and turn it into tasty, wholesome, nutricious food sources. And, they can do that without *any* outside labor on the part of the person that ends up eating that meat. Really, very effecient. Soybeans are the closest vegetable to complete protein ===================== One that you cannot eat without processing. Time and labor intensive, plus using resources that contribute to even more animal death and suffering than if you just ate certain meats. (actually missing one amino acid, but it can be produced in you body from two others), but any beans with grain (presumably bought or bartered, unless this guy is a machine) can do as well. k For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Offbreed" wrote in message
BAck to the original poster's question, in my opinion, being fully self sufficient on a single, small plot of land would be *very* difficult without eating some sort of animal products. First, there's a limit to how many varieties of plants will grow in one place. Second, a typical garden produces vegetation that humans cannot eat and animals can, so a gardiner can get more food value out of a small piece of land by adding chickens, quail, rabbits, guinea pigs, or some other small livestock to the "farm". That vegetation that humans cannot eat represents sunshine, hours of weeding, buckets of water carried, and a lot of other resources, and it seems to me a waste to stick it in a compost heap without processing it through some critter first. Such self sufficiency would not be "easy", even with livestock, without a lot of knowledge and skill, and suitible land. A very good summation of the situation. None of my gardening experience is applicable to where I am now, so I generally stay out of discussions on growing stuff. Not all of us in misc survivalism enjoy proving ourselves to be fools by mouthing off about stuff we don't know. Another very good summation of the situation. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Babberney" wrote in
Well, I'm not a vegan, but as a vegetarian I definitely disagree with that. to produce meat, you have to feed the animal in question. Not if you pick the right animal in the right climate. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:24:00 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote: I don't think so. How much grass is in your diet? Animals can take completely inedible, to people, plant material and turn it into tasty, wholesome, nutricious food sources. And, they can do that without *any* outside labor on the part of the person that ends up eating that meat. Really, very effecient. Sure, if you have an unlimited source of grass year-round. The cattle operations I've seen have to supplement feed in winter. Soybeans are the closest vegetable to complete protein ===================== One that you cannot eat without processing. Time and labor intensive, plus using resources that contribute to even more animal death and suffering than if you just ate certain meats. I admit shelling beans can be tedious and time consuming, but I don't know how that contributes to animal suffering (I may have had a different take back when my parent made me shell beans every night, but I don't think that's what you're talking about). Perhaps you're confusing soybeans grown on a farm for subsistence with those grown by corporate farms to make soy burger, soy hot dogs, etc. K For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:09:06 -0500, "rick etter"
wrote: ===================== And I doubt those suppliments and fortified foods are made without any impact on animals. Therefore, not realy vegan, are they, just like I said? I suspect there are vegan purists out there who would be swayed by this argument, but I think most people, even most vegans, acknowledge and accept that there is no perfect solution to any problem. We make the compromises we have to and make progress where we can. Since a self-sufficient farm would likely not employ the extreme sanitation of commercial kitchens, I suspect a vegan diet would provide plenty of B-12. ============================ So would not washing the crap off your hands. That's a quick easy way to get it. You feel free to go that route if you wish. I don't know why you keep suggesting it, though, because even the most hardcore vegans I've known are not stupid, despite what you may think. K For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Walter Daniels" wrote in message
om... "Fran" wrote 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. Unless "Bucket" is completely ignorant (i.e. a troll), he/she asked a very open ended question. One which RAL and others have apparently attempted to get qualifying info, for. So what questions did RAL ask in order to get this info hmmmmm? Using animals and a small garden, is very different from "Vegan." Precisely! Which is why I got stuck into RAL and his silly comments. It's like saying, "How high is up?" :-) Even Permaculture (a sideline interest of mine) asks qualifying questions, before attempting answers. When qualifying questions ARE asked they can certainly be very interesting and add much to the discussion. Unfortunately I don't recall a RAL asking one qualifer. That is it precisely - planning and critiquing but not doing anything about producing food at all. You fall into the same mistake that many make. If we do not constantly talk about something, we a doing nothing about it; totally ignorant about it; I admit that talking about something (even if only to oneself in a structured thinking exercise) is important and very much a part of the planning process. My beef about misc.survivalism is that it is ALL talk and no action. An edible gardent takes a lot of time to develop. It is not something that can be started form a lot of saved seeds when disaster strikes. If you wait till that disaster happens then you are done for and will certainly starve (and diservedly so if one claims to belong to a 'survivalist group'. All that preplanning and jawing on about food should have made event he dimmest realise that food, although basic is THE most important item for survival). (snip) There are also many, who for various reasons, cannot "move to the country." No matter how much they might wish to. Therefore, they plan based on staying where they are. Along with this, goes the knowledge that even if they _did_ live in the country, they must plan to protect what they have, if a disaster happens. I have no beef with the fact that as a "survivalist" group, that scenario you describe (in the US at least) is considered to include weapons. I do quibble about that "if disaster happens" bit. "Food" is an everyday, and 3 times a day, need. THAT reality is a 3 times a day basic survival reality and if you aren't growing it when that disaster happens then forget starting to grow it - it's too late as you don't have the (probably) 10 years available to have a good self sufficinet garden and you certainly won't have the skills or knowledge you need. Bucket is from NZ. The reality that Bucket will face will be 3 meals each day and given that NZ is a Pacific rim country then he needs to know what to do when the ground shakes. Guns? I would imagine he/she would add them somewhere in his needs list about where he/she would put in pink toe nail polish. 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............... You are again making the same mistake you accuse us of making. I have no garden, but I "can." That is if you define it as "storing items in containers for future use." I have neither room, nor money to do what I would like to do. So, I do as much as I am able. As do others here, I am sure. Not everyone is like Bob G. He and his wife "can" much of their food supply (in one way or another). You think you can, and perhaps if you start now you will have a decent edible garden in 5 or more likely 10 years. Stoing items in containers for future use doesn't quite cut it. Especially given the fact that seeds have differing shelf lives and even within particular plant group some will grow in an area and others will not. ome 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. Which brings us back to my original point. You can be the most fantastic gardener, but if you cannot/will not protect it, you won't keep it for long. Rubbish. I have had a veggie garden for 30 years and I expect to have it till I need the zimmer frame Whether it is someone taking away your guns, your freedom to speak, your freedom to grow as much of your own food as you wish, or anything else. No matter what you do, or where you live, someone doesn't like your doing it. They will tax it, legislate it, or otherwise try to control it, "for your own good." Which really means they are offended by your doing it, and want you to stop. A good demonstration of the sort of paranoia for which misc.survivalism in well known. It still amazes me, how many think meat comes from grocery stores, or butcher shops. Who think that "eating primitively," means bringing home from Jack in the Box, or Wendy's. Or, worse yet, "Making Bread," is opening a can from Pillsbury, to put in the oven. And, these are "educated" types. Most of us in MS, know how to start with wheat berries, and go from there. It doesn't mean we do it all the time. We don't need to, yet. No, you don't need to do it but if you don't do it oftent ill you DO need to do it then you will not know how to do it properly. Theory and practice are two very different beasts. Baking bread is easy, but only when one has done it for sufficient time to know what the texture of the bread should feel like when it has been kneaded sufficently. Gardens ar not bread though Walter. They are neither as instant as bread nor do they rely wholly on the owners skill or experience base. Gardent ake time and I would expect that a minimum of 5 years would be needed before a good productive garden is under way and even THAT will take a lot of effort. 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! It is a short list, because it is an example. It was s short list because RAL doesn't have a clue about the time it will take to establish a basic edible garden. One meant to introduce reality to those who know nothing, yet. Too many know little about what/how/how much to even store. In some areas, NYC for example, they *pride* themselves on buying food every day. They have no concept whatsoever, of what they really need for 6 months to a year, or how much is involved. Many of us, do. We may not know/describe our plans as "permaculture," but it really is. Rubbish. That is not at all what permaculture is. 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? Perhaps, because he/she has so little understanding of what is needed. Most want to eat *only* Vegan style. A chicken can provide the same protein as soybeans, but with a *lot* less work. Chickens also self replicate, regardless of most weather conditions. :-) Growing your own food, requires work, no matter what you eat. Proper planning, requires that you choose how, based on weather (long and short term), proper nutrition, and *manpower* available. Get with it Walter. Bucket NEVER said that a vegan lifestyle was the way to go. RAL was the one who was off on the vegan trip not Bucket! Why don't you reread what Bucket said. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Fran" wrote in message u... "Babberney" wrote in Well, I'm not a vegan, but as a vegetarian I definitely disagree with that. to produce meat, you have to feed the animal in question. many critters that are quite edible are fairly low maint. fish being one. poultry another. Not if you pick the right animal in the right climate. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Babberney" wrote in message ... On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:09:06 -0500, "rick etter" wrote: ===================== And I doubt those suppliments and fortified foods are made without any impact on animals. Therefore, not realy vegan, are they, just like I said? I suspect there are vegan purists out there who would be swayed by this argument, but I think most people, even most vegans, acknowledge and accept that there is no perfect solution to any problem. We make the compromises we have to and make progress where we can. Since a self-sufficient farm would likely not employ the extreme sanitation of commercial kitchens, I suspect a vegan diet would provide plenty of B-12. ============================ So would not washing the crap off your hands. That's a quick easy way to get it. You feel free to go that route if you wish. ================= Don't need to. I get it from perfectly good natural sources, not from an industrialized supplement industry. Really doesn't sound all that vegan to me. But then, there are no real vegans on usenet anyway. I don't know why you keep suggesting it, though, because even the most hardcore vegans I've known are not stupid, despite what you may think. ================= That's yet to be shown, at least here on usenet... K For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
In article , "Bob Peterson"
wrote: "Fran" wrote in message u... "Babberney" wrote in Well, I'm not a vegan, but as a vegetarian I definitely disagree with that. to produce meat, you have to feed the animal in question. many critters that are quite edible are fairly low maint. fish being one. poultry another. As a kid, I couldn't eat my chickens, as they were so friendly. They lived loose on the property and never wandered far, and came whenever I called them. When they got old & ceased to be good layers they were sort of "worthless" but they liked me so much how could I eat them. My great-grandma raised huge lazy rhode island reds which lived about 80% of the time in a big barn, plus guinea hens that roamed semi-wild, & she of course thought nothing of wringing a neck & plucking then burning off the pinfeathers & preparing meals, but even seeing this as a normal activity, & eating plenty of the dear things with great relish at gran Elvy's table, i still could never eat mine, which got so old they'd've only been good boiled anyhow. If I raised them today I'd probably go for the ultra-fanciest miniature chickens since I wouldn't be able to eat them anyhow. But when I weigh the sensibility of keeping a shitload of chickens as pets instead of to eat, in the context of even a moderate degree of self-sufficiency, eating them makes vastly greater sense environmentally & wholistically than keeping 'em around cuz they're cute & friendly. And I wonder if that couldn't also be said of one's dogs. To me meat is meat, & I don't eat any of it, but for the greater majority who have decided it's essential for their needs & lifestyle, why in the world are chickens & gross-out pigs "in" but dogs & donkeys are "out." Personally if I was a meateater I'd even include worms (& DID include worms, experimentally, aeons ago before I became vegetarian). Some meat eaters think it's odd I won't eat cows, but I think it's weirder they CAN eat cows but get a gag reflex pondering a feast of bugs or puppies. But then, I don't fault the Donner party either. -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/ |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
"Babberney" wrote in message ... On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:24:00 -0500, "rick etter" wrote: I don't think so. How much grass is in your diet? Animals can take completely inedible, to people, plant material and turn it into tasty, wholesome, nutricious food sources. And, they can do that without *any* outside labor on the part of the person that ends up eating that meat. Really, very effecient. Sure, if you have an unlimited source of grass year-round. The cattle operations I've seen have to supplement feed in winter. ==================== Then your blanket staement was a ly, right? Typical vegan/ar delsuion about how meat is raised. Soybeans are the closest vegetable to complete protein ===================== One that you cannot eat without processing. Time and labor intensive, plus using resources that contribute to even more animal death and suffering than if you just ate certain meats. I admit shelling beans can be tedious and time consuming, but I don't know how that contributes to animal suffering ======================= Really? Tell me how you grow all these wonderful beans with no impact on animals or the environment. Man, around your house they must just fall like manna from heaven, eh? (I may have had a different take back when my parent made me shell beans every night, but I don't think that's what you're talking about). Perhaps you're confusing soybeans grown on a farm for subsistence with those grown by corporate farms to make soy burger, soy hot dogs, etc. ==================== Which is, btw by far the soy that is grown most. Since you like to pretend that all meat is raised the same way, then I can claim that all soy beans are the same, right? Oh, doesn't work that way? then why do you and all other ar/vegan loons here on usenet continue with the same old lys about how meat is raised? K For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement?
(Babberney) writes:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:09:06 -0500, "rick etter" wrote: And I doubt those suppliments and fortified foods are made without any impact on animals. Therefore, not realy vegan, are they, just like I said? I suspect there are vegan purists out there who would be swayed by this argument, but I think most people, even most vegans, acknowledge and accept that there is no perfect solution to any problem. We make the compromises we have to and make progress where we can. ....and besides, just because one may have to cause some small amount of harm to some animal (say, yeast) to get a complete balanced diet doesn't mean that person needs to give up on their convictions and start eating all types of meat. This is like concluding that because we can't stop all genocide, we may as well go buy a machine gun and start shooting up ethnic groups. -- mike [at] mike [dash] warren.com URL:http://www.mike-warren.com GPG: 0x579911BD :: 87F2 4D98 BDB0 0E90 EE2A 0CF9 1087 0884 5799 11BD |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement? | Edible Gardening | |||
Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement? (getting fuel) | Gardening | |||
Where is Bucket?! Was: Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement? | Edible Gardening | |||
Where is Bucket?! Was: Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement? | Gardening | |||
Where is Bucket?! Was: Self-Sufficiency Acreage Requirement? | Gardening |