|
|
Post by missj on Sept 29, 2012 19:02:15 GMT -7
So many survivalists talk about hunting to supplement their food stores in a post SHTF world. I am not a hunter, and don't dream that I could magically become one overnight....but I still think it is worth some thought as to how hunting would change in a Post SHTF environment...
I think there would be some things that make hunting easier, and a lot of things that make hunting harder, as well as miscellaneous considerations.
Easier:
-without government no permits or tags required
-without a 40 hour a week job, more time to devote to hunting
Harder:
-without tags or permits it will be a free for all- thus dwindling wildlife populations
-attracting noise may be an issue
-possibly no ability to drive, so how far can you go? and how will you bring your kill back?
Miscellaneous:
-things we don't currently think of as "food" will suddenly be on the menu, and we may not know exactly how to kill, clean, and prepare them
-safety precautions will need to change. Hunter orange might not be a good idea, but at the same time there will probably be more people in the area....
|
|
|
|
Post by cajunlady87 on Sept 30, 2012 5:13:49 GMT -7
I believe geographic location would play a big part where hunting is concerned. Different disaster scenarios could also have its effect as to whether the people population prospers or dies off.
Speaking for my area, wildlife is plentiful and don't see it dwindling unless nuclear war comes into play and even then there will be some creatures that live in waterways and will survive which is more than I can say for the human race if their area is affected.
Hunters of today are choosy as to what they hunt opting mostly for deer, rabbits and ducks in my area. That's not even putting a dent in raccoons, squirrels, a variety of birds and so many more resources of food not listed.
Hunting techniques will change, more trapping will be done as it is a quite method. Too, the use of pellet/BB guns will play a vital role as they are fairly quite to use.
The main item you will have to concern yourself with is bait to entice the birds and varmint. Birdseed, baked scraps and fish or other animals entrails can be used to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowgirlup on Sept 30, 2012 6:25:30 GMT -7
We have a lot of deer, squirrels and turkeys. I think the big problem is that everyone will think they can hunt for food. I think there will be a lot of waste because people won't know how to process the animals in addition to all the wounded ones that just wander off and die.
I'm sure a lot of people will get shot too. I could see them hunting the area dry pretty quickly...except for the squirrels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on Sept 30, 2012 6:39:59 GMT -7
Trying to pin down the number of currently active hunters is a bit difficult. From tags/licensing it could be taken as 12-15 million in the U.S., but not all states report those numbers.
Taking a WAG at it based on the number of licensed hunters, I'd say the number max's out around 20 million. Lets add 10 more million just for s***'s and giggles.
That leaves about 280 million people looking for food in the worst case scenario.
Half of that number will be armed. The half that is armed but not practicing hunters are not going to sit idly by and starve to death.
I am going to say hunting will be a lot more dangerous for more than just the animals.
|
|
|
|
Post by cajunlady87 on Sept 30, 2012 7:14:30 GMT -7
Trying to pin down the number of currently active hunters is a bit difficult. From tags/licensing it could be taken as 12-15 million in the U.S., but not all states report those numbers. Taking a WAG at it based on the number of licensed hunters, I'd say the number max's out around 20 million. Lets add 10 more million just for s***'s and giggles. That leaves about 280 million people looking for food in the worst case scenario. Half of that number will be armed. The half that is armed but not practicing hunters are not going to sit idly by and starve to death. I am going to say hunting will be a lot more dangerous for more than just the animals. I totally agree with you about hunters being at risk just as much as the animals. I know for a fact my area has an abundance of hunters which will put many at high risk if push comes to shove. Too, I live along a thoroughgare. One side is bordered by a bayou and my side is bordered by woods. In my favor is the fact I can set traps right outside my back door without straying too far, those encroaching on my property further back in the denser areas will be more at risk from other hunters. Hopefully that's how it would pan out. Something else to consider is the issue of ammo. Most hunters purchase a few boxes of ammo each year when hunting season approaches. Given a situation of not being able to do so will cut down the size of hunters tremendously. |
|
|
|
Post by tjwilhelm on Sept 30, 2012 7:37:30 GMT -7
Just a thought...
Not too long post-SHTF, even the hunters might be suffering from food shortages. It wouldn't take long to wipe out local game populations if it became a primary food source for large numbers of humans.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldcoothillbilly on Sept 30, 2012 8:14:25 GMT -7
Round here I'll use a fair number a traps an snares as well as trot lines an fish traps.
Nice thin bout traps be that ya don't have ta be there fer em ta work. But ya gotta keep a eye on em otherwise somebody else walks off with yer work.
Ain't many round here know much bout the old ways a huntin an fishin. So there gonna struggle ta harvest anythin what moves. Real tough when the fish finder quits workin!
|
|
|
|
Post by offtrail on Sept 30, 2012 9:22:23 GMT -7
If it has happened before it can happen again. In the past many animal species had been hunted to extinction. Now days animals have less resources and places to hide. Modern man on the other hand has made leaps and bounds when it comes to hunting weapons. Most states have miles and miles of wide open spaces, great for hunting not so great for the game. I can even see man using fire to chase game out of cover. Some animals will become scarce but all will become weary and hard to hunt.
|
|
|
|
Post by missj on Sept 30, 2012 11:22:00 GMT -7
I am butted up to the Mt Hood National Forrest. Every year after hunting season starts, the deer and wildlife go deeper into the woods....so a week previous you could see deer out on your hikes and walks etc. after hunting season starts, they are rarely spotted. They ain't stupid..
So if you're looking around your neighborhood thinking "wow there's so many deer here, I could live off them for a year!" keep in mind that once they are hunted, they may go deep....as deep as they can into the woods.
You can still go and get them....but now how much time and energy are you expending? How will you haul it all back? You'll have to dress and butcher the game in the bush and carry the best parts home with you....probably on your back, maybe between a group of guys, they could carry the whole animal home tied to a stick or "stretcher"....
|
|
|
|
Post by ncguy on Sept 30, 2012 12:52:57 GMT -7
I think it will depend on the population in the area you live in. The larger the population the faster the prey will disappear. Also you would probably have to worry about someone killing you to get the deer you harvested. Just my .02
|
|
|
|
Post by fenster on Oct 1, 2012 5:19:14 GMT -7
Only shoot once or use a bow. Don't allow anyone to pinpoint your location. That will be a big change for a lot of hunters.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccove on Oct 1, 2012 8:32:40 GMT -7
Well here in my area the only thing I would be hunting is squirrel and possum. Maybe a racoon or two or even a dog if it got real bad. Anyway I would use traps and snares. But seriously with all of the yahoos around me I wouldn't want to be out too long as they would shoot anything that moved, thinking it was game. I guess I could wait until they all shot each other.  Oh yeah a lot of pigeons and doves around. |
|
