Hoods Woods New Hoodlums Forum

Full Version: Living Off The Land: Delusions And Misconceptions About Hunting And Ga
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
http://woodtrekker.blogspot.be/2013/09/l...s-and.html



interesting article about caloric needs, opportunity weight etc.
I'm surprised he did not address the theoretical upper limit of caloric density which is about 260 cal/oz for pure fat/oil and how plain ol' flour and pure sugar are almost identical in density at about 100 cal/oz. It's no wonder that the inuit simply went for the gold whenever possible - seal, walrus and whale oil.



He kinda over-simplified the difference in calories from deer and bear by not pointing out the huge difference between the two regarding fat content in what season.



I doubt many of us on THIS board have any illusions about how difficult it would be to live off the land. Elsewhere, not so much...
Interesting read....yes few illusions...
[quote name='alukban' timestamp='1380155622' post='582211']



I doubt many of us on THIS board have any illusions about how difficult it would be to live off the land. Elsewhere, not so much...

[/quote]



Well said. Very well said.







DD
[quote name='ddennis2' timestamp='1380158715' post='582218']

[quote name='alukban' timestamp='1380155622' post='582211']



I doubt many of us on THIS board have any illusions about how difficult it would be to live off the land. Elsewhere, not so much...

[/quote]



Well said. Very well said.







DD

[/quote]

I concur







Griz
I would never dispute the hardships of living off the land and really appreciate the caloric info. In the past I've looked at the weight of shotgun shells and compared them to the weight of a dove breast/squirrel and wondered at the validity of grabbing a 12 ga for survival on foot (having a horse/mule to carry the weight would change things, including food requirements) - especially considering the average hunter uses, at best, 2 shells per dove (I got that from a Dept of Conservation study which utilized people with binos observing hunted fields). However, I question the actual caloric needs. Once something like a deer is procured, I'm relatively sitting on my ass for quite a while vs the caloric intake for hiking 15 - 20 miles per day with a 30# pack. Of course, preserving the meat will be additional work. After you get a shelter done and a large chunk of calorie source obtained, one's caloric needs will drop drastically. Think about a leopard that weighs about the size of an average man - without the higher metabolism, huge energy investment in kills, missed kills, territory maintenance, and fighting. They only eat about once/week. I'm also assuming I'm not competing with the rest of society in this adventure. Any thoughts, am I full of shit?
Sixteen squirrels a day to survive!

Naw, a bear would be better economy at 0.047 flesh of bear a day, so how long would a bear feed a person? <img src='http://hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />

My brother tried to live off the land in the Yorkshire Dales. They robbed a remote café outside of some show caves at the end. <img src='http://hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Tongue' />



Very interesting link.



<img src='http://hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsup.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':thumbsup:' /> Thank you.



Limey Pete
IIRC Ron touched on this subject in a couple DVD's but the numbers he used were a bit different.

Still this makes an M-6 sound like a decent choice.
I remember many years ago, when taking an Anthropology class at Purdue, the Professors shared the results of some recent [sub](back then)[/sub] studies.



Folks like the Bushman in the Kalahari, Pygmies in the Ituri—and a few other hunter and gatherer groups till extant—averaged working about 40 hours per week.



That would include hunting, fishing, digging for roots, making bows etc.



It might not include time on the march as a group.



It turns out that if you have to devote more than 40 hours per week food gathering in normal times, come a drought or famine or whatever, and you won't survive it.



His point was that the only places that we find hunter-gatherers today is some of the most Godawful barren country around. That's the only land still unclaimed.



Olde Tyme hunter gatherer's in days gone by, living on much richer land must have had time on their hands.



Today?



Well most of the rich land is taken. Hypothetically, living either in the Sawtooth, the Mojave or wherever would be beyond most.



Trying to live by sneaking around in cultivated country and hunting or trapping in the little woods lots and hedgerows would also be next to impossible.



{Note: I concede that a skilled Poacher like Ragnar Benson Might be able to harvest most of his family's meat from the wild—though I'm not sure how honest a chronicler Benson is. But you'd be using high tech to do it. Also, I assume that even the Benson family gets their corn, potatoes, flour, sugar, etc. from the grocery or by growing it...}



Three or four years After TEOTWAWKI, After most humans have died, it is debatable how quickly large quantities of wildlife will reestablish themselves.





{Note: The 40 hour thing is a coincidence. Also, it applies only to hunter gatherers. Living as a horticulturalist or even an agriculturalist can be very labor intensive.}









......RVM45 [Image: cool.gif][Image: thumbsup.gif][Image: cool.gif]
[quote name='ddennis2' timestamp='1380158715' post='582218']

[quote name='alukban' timestamp='1380155622' post='582211']



I doubt many of us on THIS board have any illusions about how difficult it would be to live off the land. Elsewhere, not so much...

[/quote]



Well said. Very well said.







DD

[/quote]



I saw a guy on youtube that did it. Just sayin... <img src='http://hoodswoods.net/IVB/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/whistling.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':whistling:' />
[quote name='RVM45' timestamp='1380215237' post='582259']Three or four years After TEOTWAWKI, After most humans have died, it is debatable how quickly large quantities of wildlife will reestablish themselves.

[/quote]



Earlier this century deer were about wiped out in MO, now they're like roaches. Without humans around, deer could almost triple their population every year. Each year hunters remove about a quarter of the herd, not including predation and vehicle accidents just to keep the population in check. Take a look at this study, especially the chart on p 3, and the population explosion around 1980 when hunters even harvested 1/2 the population.
I watched this recently.



300 minutes+ filmed in the '60 .... thank goodness someone recorded it.



This family was living totally unsupported in the western desert.... hard to imagine a more desolate environment.



The notes tell the behind the scenes truth.... unlike contemporary reality shows.



This lifestyle was only possible with very low population densities (infanticide was a large part of their family planning regime)



........... and with generations of cultural memory / learning to rely upon.



And of course very low expectations..............



http://nfsa.gov.au/collection/film-austr...am/?sn=911
Thompson recorded lots of good stuff too, but in a much more benign environment and 30 or 40 years earlier.......



http://sa-staging.com/search-programs/program/?sn=8169
This was posted elsewhere, on another forum, but is too good not to reiterate here IMO............



http://www.westonaprice.org/traditional-...and-grease
Deerstalker, did you have the actual DVD in hand or find a D/L link?
Pages: 1 2