Ken,
I commend you for a masterful job of avoiding a direct answer to every one of my questions.
In fact, you did more than avoid them, but you did your best to ridicule them while avoiding answering them. One would almost believe you had received actual training in sowing disinformation and suddenly not understanding what "living off the land suggests". Amazing how someone who considers himself savvy enough to be properly "prepared" for Y2K, can suddenly feign ignorance of the most basic of survivalist terminology.
But hey, I'm not the one talking about subsisting off the land on venison and fish and claiming that the population of the US is in danger of living under a Y2K induced famine next year because the food distribution system will be completely defunct.
As for depleting fish populations, in the event that the US population is forced to fish for their dinner, I imagine they'll be depleted some few months shortly after the Fish & Game dept stops stocking the lakes and rivers.
You did incorporate that in your master survival plan didn't you?
I know of very few places in these United States where F&G is not involved in active fish stocking activities. I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, home of some of the biggest steelhead and rainbow trout, as well as salmon anywhere in the lower 48. But even there the lakes were heavily stocked by hand.
I believe that's why there are catch limits in most states. So if you don't live within commute or walking distance of the ocean, consider yourself a vegetarian.
And ok Ken... so maybe it won't be 250 million Americans, maybe only half that many. Let's just ask ourselves what would happen if everyone currently living in any urban area worthy of calling itself a "city" suddenly decided to move to a rural location where they felt there was sufficient fish, fowl, or game to subsist upon should the food distribution network completely and irrevocably collapse??
I feel that that would amount to some 100 million people at least. So tell what would be the result?? It should not be too absurd to answer. Just tell us everything you've done or think we should do and multiply that by at least 100 million individuals.
Go on... give it a shot. I know you can do it.
I can't tell you all the definitions. But just use your own. Describe what you've done and tell us what would be the result if 1/3 the population of the United States did the same.
And Ken... next time... try to be less obvious in your avoidance of hard questions. Your not smart enough to hide behind legalese and fine print. |
