14

# Vegans vs. The Omnivores~ Survival

ehBeth

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:30 am
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:
Big difference.

not in the hunting/trapping equation (I've been reading a lot of Farley Mowat lately).
Cycloptichorn

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:31 am
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:

That's something to clarify with Joe I think -- he said "fifty miles square." That could mean that it's a square(ish) shape that's 50 miles long and 50 miles wide (for a total of 250 sq. miles) -- or that it's more like approximately 7 miles long and 7 miles wide (49 sq. miles). I took him to mean the latter but I'm not sure.

Haha, that would be 2500 square miles, not 250. That would be a lot bigger!

Cycloptichorn
sozobe

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:31 am
@ehBeth,
Yeah I edited that off for that reason. (It's a big difference in size but for the purposes of what's being discussed not that different.) (Love Farley Mowat.)
0 Replies

sozobe

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:31 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Gah. Never mind me. My clarification is not very clarifying!
0 Replies

Thomas

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:34 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Uh, Yellowstone is somewhere around 70 times as large as this island.

Arithmetic --- you're doing it wrong. "Fifty miles square" means 50 miles x 50 miles, which is 2,500 square miles. According to your source, Yellowstone is 3,472 square miles, larger by a factor of 1.36. Long Island is 1,401 square miles, smaller by a factor of 1.8. So my comparisons were correct, at least within the normal margin of hand-waving; yours are off by one or two orders of magnitude. Moral of story: Never confuse miles square with square miles. They are not the same.
Cycloptichorn

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:40 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Uh, Yellowstone is somewhere around 70 times as large as this island.

Arithmetic --- you're doing it wrong. "Fifty miles square" means 50x50 miles, which is 2,500 square miles.

Do you have an independent source confirming that this is a recognized distinction? I ask, because I've never once seen the usage that you are claiming here. Serious question.

Though, this is a distraction from the overall point: harvesting and preparing wheat for consumption with no modern tools is likely incredibly difficult, and I have a hard time seeing how the people in question would be able to survive the lean times between harvests without resorting to some sort of animal consumption.

Cycloptichorn
ehBeth

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:48 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
So my comparisons were correct,

but they don't matter for the hunting/trapping part of the vegan/omnivore comparison

1913 hunting grounds of the Timagami tribe

http://temagami.nativeweb.org/map-hunting-grounds.shtml

http://temagami.nativeweb.org/

4 000 square mile [survey, U.S. statute] = 1 035 999.4 hectare
http://www.onlineconversion.com/area.htm

14 families covered the entire territory

our omnivores can manage 1/10th of that
0 Replies

Joe Nation

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:57 am
To clarify: when I said 'fifty miles square' I imagined I was talking about a place that was blockish shaped with fifty miles sides. (50 x 50) . I wanted the folks to have plenty of room.

Fifty square miles is more the size of Nantucket (I looked it up). That would be a fun place to have this fight.

But no, fifty miles square is about the size of Puerto Rico.

Joe(I need a bigger picture of PR)Nation
Thomas

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 10:59 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Do you have an independent source confirming that this is a recognized distinction? I ask, because I've never once seen the usage that you are claiming here. Serious question.

How about the very first paragraph in this Wikipedia article? If Wikipedia isn't good enough, just Google it and take your pick. Your error is a fairly common one.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Though, this is a distraction from the overall point:

If so, that would make it your distraction. I merely responded to it.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
harvesting and preparing wheat for consumption with no modern tools is likely incredibly difficult, and I have a hard time seeing how the people in question would be able to survive the lean times between harvests without resorting to some sort of animal consumption.

"No modern tools" cuts both ways. Have you ever tried to set up ehBeth's 50-mile trap line without modern tools, and with only 20 co-omnivores to set it up? Have you ever tried, without modern tools, to dig a deep-enough pit to trap a wild pig in? Have you ever tried to hunt down a wild animal with a hand-made spear? (That spear would also have to be tooth-sharpened --- no modern tools to sharpen it, remember?) Have you ever made a fishing net without modern tools? To make for a sustainable source for food, these things take an incredible amount of effort and energy! You're fantasizing if you think that vegans would be the only ones having a hard time without modern tools.
Setanta

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 11:04 am
Spears can easily be sharpened using a fire and a rock with a sharp edge.
Ceili

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 11:10 am
@Joe Nation,
Puerto Rico is 3,515 sq miles.
Thomas

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 11:12 am
@Setanta,
Thanks for the correction. Next, have you ever hunted a wild animal with one? How would you compare the calorie expenditure with picking nuts off a tree?
0 Replies

Joe Nation

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 11:13 am
@Ceili,
Right.
I was looking for something squareish and about 2500 miles......so we will cut off the East end of Puerto Rico and have it.

Joe(so long San Juan)Nation
tsarstepan

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 11:17 am
@Joe Nation,
Joe Nation wrote:

Right.
I was looking for something squareish and about 2500 miles......so we will cut off the East end of Puerto Rico and have it.

Joe(so long San Juan)Nation

Go ahead. They won't mind. Especially if the cause is for science!
0 Replies

Cycloptichorn

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:05 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:

"No modern tools" cuts both ways. Have you ever tried to set up ehBeth's 50-mile trap line without modern tools? Have you ever tried, without modern tools, to dig a deep-enough pit to trap a wild pig in? Have you ever tried to hunt down a wild animal with a hand-made spear? (That spear would also have to be tooth-sharpened --- no modern tools to sharpen it, remember?) Have you ever made a fishing net without modern tools? To make for a sustainable source for food, these things take an incredible amount of effort and energy! You're phantasizing if you think that vegans would be the only ones having a hard time without modern tools.

The answer to all your questions here is yes. I took a month-long survival course one summer during my time in the boy scouts, in which we were given nothing - not even a knife - and sent out to survive. We had adult supervision who would step in with tools and food if things got grim, but we had to build stone axes and tools ourselves. It took three days to get a stone ax that would cut worth a damn. But only a two days after that to build a functioning trout box that would catch all that we could eat. We lived like kings for the rest of the month.

I will say that hunting animals with the spears we made - not tooth sharpened, but sharpened with a stone knife, c'mon man - was definitely not easy. We caught nothing the entire time. But, hunting - instead of building pitfall traps and corrals - is a fool's game.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies

ehBeth

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:47 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
Have you ever tried to set up ehBeth's 50-mile trap line without modern tools, and with only 20 co-omnivores to set it up?

It's still being done in some parts of Northern Canada (without modern tools in some cases), although you'd likely have one or two people on a 50-mile trap line, not 20.

make your own fishing net - I'm sure you can tie a knot or thread a needle (even make a needle if you need to)

http://www.trails.com/how_39682_fishing-net-scratch.html

2
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:49 pm
@ehBeth,
Question is - would these individuals have a computer with them so they can look up "How tos..."?
Thomas

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:50 pm
Beth and Cycloptichorn, I stand educated. In your experience, how much easier are these things compared to picking berries and nuts, and --- later in the 10-year period --- farming beans and wheat?
ehBeth

1
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:52 pm
I didn't have a computer when I learned to tie the knots required to make a net - hamburgboy's an expert on knot-tying - but it's not hard to figure out - which is why people around the world figured it out centuries (millenia?) ago.

Similarly, it's not that difficult to figure out how to make different types of ground traps.
0 Replies

Setanta

4
Thu 24 May, 2012 12:54 pm
People netted birds, too. All agricultural labor is hard labor. It's stoop work, it's backbreaking, and that's why Americans hire Latinos to do it for them.
0 Replies

### Related Topics

ADAM'S RIB - Discussion by Setanta
The end of men - Discussion by FreeDuck
LAW VS. MORAL VALUES - Discussion by Foxfyre
What is the backbone of society? - Question by Yahto
what makes someone a jerk? - Discussion by hamilton
Does truth matter anymore? - Discussion by hawkeye10