HOW WOULD YOU SURVIVE.......

[skycat 6,173]

How would you survive in a post apocalyptic situation?

 

Going on from the 'eating rats' topic, I was wondering how many people would kill and eat their dogs to survive. Imagine a scenario where our country's infrastructure had completely collapsed, and most people had either starved to death because there was no 'provided' food any more, as they didn't know how to hunt or forage for edible grub, or they'd killed each other for food.

 

This leaves the clever, the hunter, the mega bad (cannibal) and the extremely lucky!

 

So the question is: would you still keep a dog to hunt for food? Or would you say that the dog itself is likely to use up more of your valuable food resources that it is worth? Supposing of course that there are still wild animals to hunt.

 

And if you did still keep a dog, what sort of dog would you keep? Terrier, lurcher, guarding breed? Or none of the mentioned?

[whippet 99 2,613]

i think you need to go on the cannabis topic and confess what you do in the mornings.................................................

[BORDERSCOT 3,816]

How would you survive in a post apocalyptic situation?

 

Going on from the 'eating rats' topic, I was wondering how many people would kill and eat their dogs to survive. Imagine a scenario where our country's infrastructure had completely collapsed, and most people had either starved to death because there was no 'provided' food any more, as they didn't know how to hunt or forage for edible grub, or they'd killed each other for food.

 

This leaves the clever, the hunter, the mega bad (cannibal) and the extremely lucky!

 

So the question is: would you still keep a dog to hunt for food? Or would you say that the dog itself is likely to use up more of your valuable food resources that it is worth? Supposing of course that there are still wild animals to hunt.

 

And if you did still keep a dog, what sort of dog would you keep? Terrier, lurcher, guarding breed? Or none of the mentioned?

 

 

FFS Penny - not at this time in the morning.

 

Is this research for a new book - Revenge of the Zombie Lurchers... :thumbs:

[Carraghs Gem 1,675]

//

[paulus 26]

i would just go the local paki shop even in in a post apocalyptic situation there would still be a few

[skycat 6,173]

 

 

FFS Penny - not at this time in the morning.

 

Is this research for a new book - Revenge of the Zombie Lurchers... :thumbs:

 

:laugh:

My brain works best in the mornings: what little there is left of it and yes, one day I'll write a post-apocalyptic novel: I love this type of book. And no, it won't have zombies in it: let's face it, the zombie thing has been done to death (sorreee!) in recent years.

[scothunter 12,609]

Well I'll indulge you. Lol

Firstly in that type of scenario, there would be no point in staying put in the one place. If the food situation was that bad, you would soon use up all recourses around you. Therefore you would need to keep moving, and scavenging. So taking a dog with you IMO wouldn't be such a good idea. You are bound to meet other desperate people like yourself , who would see your dog as a means to survive, and so be it if the have to kill you in the process. Also like you said, if your struggling to survive so will the dog. I'm afraid it's every man and beast for itself.

[hyperion 122]

I think you would very soon end up with just a general pack type dog of a none descript breed much like a dingo or other primative dog, a sort of retro-evolution of dog if you like, you would have to become nomadic and the dogs would have to hunt/scavenge for their own food or starve or be eaten.

 

There is little doubt in my mind that the first dogs domesticated by humans were seen as a source of food and not only as providers of food.

 

Also getting off this tiny island and onto the continent would be high on my list of things to do, greater area equals a greater chance of survival.

[Born Hunter 17,751]

I guess the dogs you kept would be dictated by the quarry hunted. The way things stand a brace of decent lurchers would certainly be beneficial to a savvy hunter. They would obviously have to be a very tough sort and you couldn't possibly expect to keep your entire blood line, too many dogs for a survivor.

 

If pigs and cattle turned wild and were a quarry a whole different animal would be needed. Big bully hound type I suppose.

 

For a lone nomad a small but handy terrier type thing would be ideal. Requires little feeding, nose and hunting drive would be invaluable, tough as feck. Just a great little alrounder type thing.

 

But personally, meat wouldn't be my worry, medicine and edible plant matter would be my concern. That and how to support those that just aren't cut out for it.

[fieldsportsman 107]

depends how good the dog was

[scothunter 12,609]

Well if the world was completely f****d up, think you would need to resort to some barbaric things to stay alive. Oh and if you have a fall or an accident, or god forbid a medical ailment. Well quite frankly you be better off killing yourself

[fireman 10,863]

I'd get a few Aussie Cattle dog x's and rule the world and Mad Max didn't do to bad with one either .

[skycat 6,173]

I guess the dogs you kept would be dictated by the quarry hunted. The way things stand a brace of decent lurchers would certainly be beneficial to a savvy hunter. They would obviously have to be a very tough sort and you couldn't possibly expect to keep your entire blood line, too many dogs for a survivor.

 

If pigs and cattle turned wild and were a quarry a whole different animal would be needed. Big bully hound type I suppose.

 

For a lone nomad a small but handy terrier type thing would be ideal. Requires little feeding, nose and hunting drive would be invaluable, tough as feck. Just a great little alrounder type thing.

 

But personally, meat wouldn't be my worry, medicine and edible plant matter would be my concern. That and how to support those that just aren't cut out for it.

 

But would you .... support those that aren't cut out for it? How far would you go to support people who couldn't contribute to a group survival in any way?

 

Let's suppose that hunting and gathering are the only means of survival: not enough resources to support a large and useless group of people: now it gets a whole lot more interesting ............ do you actively decide to 'out' the useless members of the group, or do you try and find something that they can do of use?

[whippet 99 2,613]

i would go to penny taylors house as i know for sure we would fall in love , and then her dogs would look after us and i would have no worries in the world and live happily ever after........................

[Born Hunter 17,751]

But would you .... support those that aren't cut out for it? How far would you go to support people who couldn't contribute to a group survival in any way?

 

Let's suppose that hunting and gathering are the only means of survival: not enough resources to support a large and useless group of people: now it gets a whole lot more interesting ............ do you actively decide to 'out' the useless members of the group, or do you try and find something that they can do of use?

 

Moral dilemma Penny. Hard times require hard decisions and hard men/women. My instinct would be to f**k off on my own so I have only myslef to consider. But logically survival would be increased in a smallish group. Naturally people would want to support their loved ones, but what happens when those loved ones just aren't cut out for a 'wild life'? I suppose even the biggest 'towny' could be given jobs to do as long as they were willing. Simple fact is I would bust my gut for an individual if they showed willing and heart but if one just didnt even make an effort then they would have to be fecked off, loved one or not.

 

How far would I go? Impossible to say untill tested.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Born Hunter