Which gets depleted first game or fish?
Posted by Traditional-Leader54@reddit | preppers | View on Reddit | 175 comments
In a total collapse scenario I know both game and fish would probably get depleted due to the large number of people likely to turn to hunting and fishing for protein sources. Just wondering which one you think would get depleted first?
I’m not depending on either as part of my long term plan but I thought it was an interesting question.
TheLostExpedition@reddit
China ran out of food, (including bugs) and stated eating each other during the whatever they called it. 80's and 90's I think. Don't depend on nature or a stockpile. Depend on both and have a plan to farm or gather something renewable.
lonewarrior76@reddit
During the depression, deer became extinct in many places in the United States. Later the population recovered. I'm guessing game will go first in many areas Fishing will probably thin out, but the vitamins & minerals in red meat will be compelling for many undernourished.
Eventually horses, donkeys, pets etc. Hunger is a terrible thing.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
You're not factoring in the modern technological world we live in compared to the era of the Great Depression... more people back then probably knew how to skin/field dress an animal and build a fire.
I would wager all the gold, bullets and food I have stashed away that 9/10 people in 2024 'Merica have no clue how to do either of those basic things.
Just my opinion... based on observing people, society and things in general for the last few decades.
dreadedowl@reddit
I think we need to realize people are quite adaptable. And quickly the dozen people that cannot hunt will latch to and provide services to a person that can bring in food. So if 10% of the population can hunt/field dress/cook/fire/etc they will be sent out hunting all the time while the other 90% either clean, gather firewood, boil water, gather berries, provide adult services to the hunter, etc.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
Very altruistic outlook you have and I commend that.
But, in all honesty and for the sake of good discussion, your assumption that those of us in this "population" can do all those things you've listed, on their own or perhaps even with the help of their chosen partner... why would they allow people to "latch on" as you say?
Yes, I understand strength in numbers and all that jazz but realistically if the shit has already hit the proverbial fan... the last thing I will be looking for is adult favors (last thing on my to do list would be busting a nut) and more mouths to feed and protect.
Survival mode is just that. Survival first and foremost. Procreate later. Much, much later.
Just my opinion and to be brutally honest... who the fuck really knows how things will go down/shake out?
dreadedowl@reddit
Fair points. If you can hunt you are going to need help to live no matter what. One cannot live long by themselves, just look at the TV show Alone. Experts barely make it 100 days. People need people. And while the last thing you think about is sex, I assure you many people won't think of that last (I guess it depends on what stage we are at, week 1-2 probably not so much).
I wouldn't call the people dead weight in my example. People hauling firewood, medical help, cooking (can be taught easily enough), cleaning, tending to day to day operations. I'm not thinking 100% of the people will be alive, but of the some percentage left, not everyone will need hunting as a skill set.
Obviously I'm just guessing on things. No one knew drones were going to be death bombs in the Ukraine war. You are correct, no one can really predict what is going to happen.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
I agree with most of your points... except the being alone part.
Some people do just fine on their own for extended periods of time.
Google Dick Proenneke. That is real life.
Not a TV show.
Referencing Alone, check out Roland. Winner of season whatever, not really sure.
That man is the epitome of survivor/old ways in the modern world.
premar16@reddit
Yes but you forgot we as a people evolve and learn pretty quickly. THose who know how to do those things can teach others how so more and more people can do it.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
Well... those people can learn how to survive on their own then.
Call me callous if you like.
I'll call myself a realist.
bhxg62n@reddit
I agree with some of what you said here, but what skills do modern adults posses that would be valuable enough for me to spend my valuable time training them? Banking? Computer skills? How to run a marathon?
When the power is gone and the fuel sources no longer exist, skills like making clothing from raw materials (a tanned animal hide) or even shelter building will belong to such a small group of people that I struggle to even think of how these people would gather together. While I can hunt and fish, trapping and tanning and preserving meat are beyond me. How do I find anyone who has valuable skills to compliment my skills before we all die?
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
I agree with you 100%.
The expression: About as useful as tits on a boar comes to mind.
premar16@reddit
This might benefit you directly but it may benefit the new society as a whole. A person who can help society with accounting in the new society being created. That skill is not useless. People also have other skills beyond their job title. I know a lawyer who spends his free time canning and making clothes . You do know there are other jobs that are not just computing and banking ...right. Not every person has desk jobs and no skills. People who care about community share their skills and education because it betters civilization as a whole not because it benefits them.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
Your assumption that people who have a well rounded skill set would even want to be a part of some community is rather speculative and presumptuous.
What if said people were misanthropes? Or perhaps they loathe the idea of having to support NPC meatbags?
tsoldrin@reddit
you would be better off raising chickens and rabbits.
gramma-space-marine@reddit
Chickens are loud, rabbits are quiet and reproduce much more quickly.
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
But rabbit can't sustain you
_Burninat0r_@reddit
That's why you prep a bunch of lard or smth. Not hard to store years worth of fat.
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
Smth?
EconomistPlus3522@reddit
Bwhaha no one eats only rabbit
alexandria3142@reddit
If you eat the fat as well and organs, you’ll be fine. Meat rabbits aren’t as lean as wild rabbits
tsoldrin@reddit
a hen can make an egg every day and does not need a rooster to do so. an egg per hen, every day.
gramma-space-marine@reddit
I have the 3 most frequent egg producing chicken breeds and they don’t lay an egg per day… do you have any chickens? I’m not saying don’t have chickens, but if you’re trying to lay low in SHTF your chickens will be very apparent to everyone. Everyone in a mile radius knows I have hens.
RenThras@reddit
Live out in the country away from people.
And have guns.
Simple solutions.
theillustriousnon@reddit
People will be depleted first, largely because most have lost the ability to hunt or fish.
TrekRider911@reddit
Even if they hunt and kill something, almost no one knows how to butcher, let alone preserve without freezers.
Reduntu@reddit
I think this is incorrect. Anyone with a canoe and some nets and deplete a small pond of damn near all the fish in about a week. Now imagine an entire community with motorboats, nets, fishing poles, etc all trying to get those same fish. Fish only exist in the wild because it's illegal for regular people to use nets, dynamite, etc to harvest them.
Triscuitmeniscus@reddit
But that's only relevant for small, isolated bodies of water like streams, ponds, and small lakes. The Great Lakes and other very large lakes, rivers with anadromous fish runs, estuaries, and the oceans will all have a much larger standing stock, be more difficult to fish, and will have much greater production than a small stream or pond.
There are essentially no limits for white perch in the MD portion of Chesapeake Bay: there is an 8" minimum for nets, no minimum for hook and line (commercial and recreational). Their fishery management plan is basically "catch as much as you can, if they ever get scarce we'll consider putting the brakes on." That's with a full-on motorized commercial fishery harvesting them all year.
theillustriousnon@reddit
Ever worked a net out of a canoe?
Reduntu@reddit
Yes, they work.
theillustriousnon@reddit
Then you know how few people are capable of doing that. That said, the original point is that most will be gone too fast to worry about a depletion of fish and game, lacking both the skills and the tools to take them. The other thing to consider is preserving food, which even fewer people understand without refrigeration.
Reduntu@reddit
Most people could effectively net a pond with no training. You could swim or walk them out far enough to be effective. We used gillnets with a small anchor and floater on each end. Just straighten it out perpendicular to shore and let it sit. The fish swim into it and get trapped. Then it's as easy as pulling them in.
squidwardTalks@reddit
I really think this is going to be location dependent. In the US there are large recreational hunting/fishing populations. In the midwest I think the deer population would go down pretty fast.
hzpointon@reddit
They did during the great depression.
tempest1523@reddit
And our population has tripled since the Great Depression. So it would be depleted that much quicker.
thefedfox64@reddit
Wouldn't that also mean they would die out equally as fast? The projections are like 3 months 75% pop is dead. That's one season. Deer population would explode, hell wild pig population would explode
Open-Attention-8286@reddit
The better hunters would be the ones that survive, and they would no longer have to deal with bag limits and designated hunting seasons.
There would also be the need to protect crops against wildlife, and the increased competition for foraged foods.
I think most game, big or small, would be hit hard and stay scarce until society gets back on it's feet.
Fish would be hit hard, but they aren't sharing as much space with the humans, so as long as the waters are deeper than 10-15 feet, most of the fish species would have a better chance of maintaining a breeding population than land-dwelling animals.
Fish with known migratory runs would probably be hit the hardest. Salmon especially. Their spawning routes would be full of nets and fish traps.
thefedfox64@reddit
But who is doing this fishing? Who is doing this hunting? Most people don't hunt, and most people don't fish. 18% of the population is above 65 - 15% of those above 65 are alone - 27% of women over 65 are widowed or divorced (not saying they can't hunt/fish) and its estimated that around 8% of the US above 65 are infirm/unable to care for themselves. Then we have children under 14 - a whooping 18% of the population- (not saying they can't hunt/fish but statistically its unlikely). Then going into hunting licenses about 5% total of the US pop has gotten those (again not saying people can't/won't but like realistically people who don't know most likely won't). In term of hunting locations - Chicago, New York, LA - Miami - Boston - DC - not huge hunting area's compared to say St. Louis or Boulder. For Salmon - how many people are going to be near these area's to make an impact? Now a lot of people fish because they are able to get there, in SHTF - I highly doubt the migratory rich wall streeters are going to fly into Salmon country. And without salt and such, I don't people will be catching them in such numbers as to compare to today's numbers (And fishermen won't be catching to sell cross country either).
To me, the cold hard reality is like what has happened in the past. People will sit in their homes, and starve to death. It happened in China, Russia, and throughout the world. Some will rise above - no doubt. But most, will just sit and wait like many do. Scraping together what they can, and then just dying from exhausting, heart failure, parasites. I do agree that within 3 months most of the US will be dead via starvation.
HappyCamperDancer@reddit
Well look at the population in Gaza after 12 months of practically no food or water and no way to store any provisions.
There were 2.2 million people in 2023 Now there are 2.1 million today.
Somehow most have survived even with bombing and starving. Very little aid.
thefedfox64@reddit
That's not a very good example; war and such are not the same as societal collapse. Mainly because there is aid coming in, and people are working - goods are flowing. Regardless of aid there is still commerce. We are talking like - completely shut down, complete out of work, no bills, no running to the store cause ain't no one there. No garbage picked up, no logging in to watch youtube video's or read reddit. No cell service to call grandma, no trains on tracks or trucks shipping goods. Complete and utter collapse. Like some twist of fate and every electronic on the planet was fried - that type of collapse. Not "Ok Canada is having a hard time, other countries can help out"
Brilliant_Wealth_433@reddit
The thing with hogs is they are not super easy to hunt. Especially once they become under pressure they get real smart real fast. Non experienced hunters are going to have issues with them. They are going to go full on nocturnal and have excellent hearing and smell.
thefedfox64@reddit
Yup, and given access to food and no one driving them away (in a SHTF situation) they will... explode in population.
Brilliant_Wealth_433@reddit
So will the large predators. It won't happen nearly as fast but give it 5 years or more and if humans are basically wiped out Grizzlies will push down further into the lower 48 and will certainly kill some Pigs. Where I am at due to a massive deer population we already have in very healthy cougar population. The wolves also will push down further south as humans no longer keep those numbers in check. That is of course if humans fall in numbers enough the prey species boom in numbers. If people eat everything up first we'll, then I guess we'll be on the menu more often.
ScumBunny@reddit
Mmm wild pig🫠 such good meat
epicprone@reddit
I totally believe that. I think it would be interesting to read an article about how different deep populations in the US were affected during the Great Depression.
HappyCamperDancer@reddit
My dad worked as a "relief" worker during the great depression. He had to talk people into taking "relief" to keep their kids alive. Many still didn't as they were too proud. My dad said it killed him to watch little kids starve to death in front of him because the parents were to proud to take a measly few dollars to put a simple meal in their bellies. That was dad's first round with ptsd. WWII in guadalcanal was his 2nd round of ptsd.
9n223@reddit
For sure. Just between Minnesota and Wisconsin, they have the 4th largest army in the world just from hunters alone. And to be fair, most people can figure out how to aim a rifle or shotgun, especially with an optic of some kind. Around my part of Iowa, I've personally had deer encounters within 10 yards of myself and have heard stories of deer coming as close as 5 feet from other hunters. So, as long as they are patient and silent, almost anyone can take a deer. And if they hunt in groups, they can push an entire treeline and get multiple at a time. In short, deer would be extinct within a few months, I'd say. The fish may be a different story depending on river or lake.
tree-hermit@reddit
oh yeah, deer pop would be absolutly hammered in the midwest.
Bubskiewubskie@reddit
I live out in the sticks and teach. Our kids will be fine. They used a paper clip, string, and some food smuggled from the cafeteria. They bloody caught a fish through the storm drain. Some will make it lol.
irish-riviera@reddit
I just saw that IG video. Kids caught a pumpkin seed out of the storm drain....
bhxg62n@reddit
I am from the Midwest, living in NJ for the past 30 years. Almost everyone I know that hunts in NJ can field dress a deer, but cannot butcher or skin! And everyone in NJ hunts over bait! Not sure if those people would make it very long trying to survive off of dear. All of the pheasant hunters hunt in stocked areas, and I only know a couple of duck hunters.
Gloomy_Living7255@reddit
I was going to say the same thing those skills are both being lost over time not to mention taking gas powered boats and ATV/UTVs out of the equation
getapuss@reddit
And while maybe not most a significant part of the population doesn't even know how to cook for themselves anymore.
fdxcaralho@reddit
And because ill be hunting them /s
justanotherguyhere16@reddit
Depends where you are.
Inland lakes and streams will empty quick. Especially anything that isn’t currently self sustaining. Game will stand a better chance since less people and more game in the middle of country.
Meanwhile on the coasts the oceans will start to rejuvenate but the local game will be hunted out fairly quickly.
Just my opinion
RedYamOnthego@reddit
Why wouldn't people start raising goats or cows in their backyard, assuming that the environment is OK for hunting and fishing? Or chickens, or even pigeons? Sell to city people (some of whom could domesticate pigeons on a commercial scale if enough people have died in their apartment buildings).
Game & fish is a lot harder than domesticated animals.
Triscuitmeniscus@reddit
I think this is the "real" answer unless you make up some contrived Hollywood-style disaster that quickly eliminates 98% of the human population world-wide, yet somehow doesn't lead to the wholesale destruction of any other species or their habitat. In any remotely plausible scenario farmers and the people that keep chickens, goats, guinea pigs, and any other food-worthy domestic animal would just start trading meat for gold, copper wire, gas, water, medical supplies, blow jobs, cowrie shells, or whatever else we start using as currency. Transportation networks would sprout up, markets would form, and before you know it we'd be living similar to how we did 200 years ago.
People assume that SHTF means we go back to the Stone Age. It's more likely we'd go back to just before the Industrial Revolution, say the 1750's, then proceed all the way up to the 1940's in about 2 generations.
premar16@reddit
I also wonder this. I think people would not immmediately go into hunter/gather mode. We would try to get back into farming and raising livestock animals. More cows,chickens,goats,etc. People can raise chickens and rabbits in the suburbs. People do it now. Not everyone has land for it but that has always been the case. People would just trade with with the people who did have the larger farm animals or help work on those farms in exchange for food. We wouldnt have big box stores but local markets would be more important and would pop up. In my area we have one large established farmers market and then a couple smaller ones through out the county.
RedYamOnthego@reddit
And not everyone would have to do it! Exactly! There's a reason our ancestors turned to herding instead of hunting.
Traditional-Leader54@reddit (OP)
Goats and cows require a decent amount of land. Chickens and rabbits are the best animals to raise for food with pigs being third since the can thrive on all the scraps of food you don’t eat.
RedYamOnthego@reddit
Deer require a decent amount of land and an expenditure of calories. Ditto for bear. If you are where hunting is a possibility, you probably are close to someone who has the land to raise cows & goats.
We have a dairy farm, and while it takes a lot of land for sileage, we also have nearly 200 cows.
premar16@reddit
Ohh love that. I grew up on a dairy farm as a kid. My family as whole still owns it even though I don't live there anymore. We are down to 100 cows.
Traditional-Leader54@reddit (OP)
As I said I’m not depending on hunting.
RedYamOnthego@reddit
I don't think most people will depend on hunting or fishing, either. And if s truly htf, fewer people will be able to afford it, so no worries about either being depleted.
inigo_fratelli@reddit
Neither they would flourish like never before because in such a situation billions would be dead
1one14@reddit
This isn't the 1930s. The game will be fine...
chubby_hubby1984@reddit
It's a toss up, because people will OVER FISH or harvest more game then they can keep from spoiling, a lot will go to waste. I believe both will be in jeopardy until people start to die off then slowly the animals will make a comeback.
Spiley_spile@reddit
A lot of game and fish are no longer safe to survive on long term, thanks to agricultural and manufacturing contamination of waterways, as well as an ever increasing number zoonotic diseases thanks to climate change and mass livestoc operations with low standards for animal care. So I hope for your sake that hunting and fishing arent ay the center of your long-term survival plan. 😬
EconomistPlus3522@reddit
The easiest stuff will deplete first
gimme3strokes@reddit
I'm gonna be that guy and say pets, game, and then non ocean fish. I honestly question if most people would make it past pets to game before they turn to cannibalism due to the lack of hunting skill and equipment. I picture the majority if people running out of food, trying for game for a few days, eating pets that won't run away, trying game again, and then people when they fail(if they don't live within walking distance of a body of water). Modern society that is used to being able to order food on their phone and have it in less than an hour won't do well after a day of hunger. We aren't the hearty people that braved the great depression or conquered the west anymore.
superduperlikesoup@reddit
The kangaroos that jump my fence to eat my plants would be in big big trouble if I was hungry.
jdertay@reddit
It’s a lot easier to shoot an animal then catch a fish in fact I don’t think fish will ever get depleted simply because of the amount of skill that goes into catching them
Maximum_Swordfish_51@reddit
dude there are places today that are running out of fish and crustaceans
nukedmylastprofile@reddit
Commercial fishing is the largest cause of fish stock depletion.
Lack of fuel and infrastructure to deal with the many millions of tonnes of commercially caught fish would see that catch rate diminish very quickly. The oceans would rebound very quickly.
Inland fisheries would no doubt be overfished for a while, but fishing is a lot harder than shooting an animal for the average person.
ChaosRainbow23@reddit
You can just run a net in the river and catch all kinds of fish.
Sure, it's illegal to do that now, but in a SHTF scenario, all bets are off.
Downtown-Side-3010@reddit
Allot of people tend to assume the average person knows how to make a gill net and place it effectively. I bet less than %1 of the us population actually knows how to, I grew up around people who hunt and fish and have never met someone who knows how to make a gill net, it’s kinda a loss art
Drake__Mallard@reddit
It's one of the preps you should probably have, in fact.
VA3FOJ@reddit
yeah, i dunno about this. im a hunter and a fisher- i can think of many places to go and be guaranteed to catch many fish right now. i dont know of a single place where i would be guaranteed to shoot an animal
Foragologist@reddit
This, but the opposite.
bleepoblopoo@reddit
How could either be depleted without commercial harvesting? I mean I guess if I had to say it would be fish. Enough people could deplete a small body of water pretty quickly I'd say, especially if it was their only source of food.
nukedmylastprofile@reddit
Inland areas would get heavily fished for sure, coastal areas would be fine as commercial pressure disappears
davidm2232@reddit
I'd think most fish would be protected in the more remote areas. It would take more energy to hike into those lakes than the food you could pack out. That is why a float plane is a good prep. Plus it is great for just general transportation when infrastructure is damaged or unsafe. They will get 20 MPG on 91 unleaded which isn't terrible.
nukedmylastprofile@reddit
Getting enough gas to keep that running for long will be the biggest challenge
nukedmylastprofile@reddit
Game would take a punishing and a lot would be wasted by people hunting and not skilled in butchering animals and preserving meat, but fish would be fine.
The collapse would probably also see a significant drop of commercial fishing pressures. While inland lakes and rivers would see extra pressure, saltwater fish would likely actually see a significant rebound in numbers, in part because the vast majority of people don't already have, and won't have easy access to, the equipment and ability to catch a lot of fish.
No fuel, no bait, and not replacing equipment easily, would quickly make things difficult for most. I've been recreationally fishing on the ocean my whole life and so many people are completely reliant on luck when fishing. Bait supplies would be depleted quickly so we'd be reliant on lure fishing which is considerably harder for the average punter.
Personally I have enough gear to last a lifetime of fishing and a couple of well set up fishing kayaks, so definitely wouldn't have any issues feeding the family with fresh fish.
Triscuitmeniscus@reddit
In order of depletion (first to last):
1) Large animals (deer, elk, turkey) and larger freshwater fish in streams, rivers, and non-Great lakes (trout, bass, pike/muskie, etc). Large land animals have relatively low density and reproduce slowly, and we can access all of their habitat. Same with larger freshwater fish.
2) Small fish in streams, rivers, non-Great lakes (bluegill, other panfish). Higher density and production than their larger cousins, easy to catch.
3) Small game animals (rabbit, squirel, dove, etc). High reproduction levels, high density.
4) Anadromous and estuarine fish (salmon, shad/herring, striped bass, drum, etc), and fish in very large (i.e. Great Lakes). We have more limited access to their habitat, they only run the gauntlet during part of their life cycle. Popular game species will likely actually recover.
5) Marine fish: populations of marine species will increase as commercial fishing pressure is eliminated.
No_Space_for_life@reddit
Nearly every year, I bring someone new hunting with me. Usually at their request, and I'll gladly oblige because new people are oddly good luck, I like to teach my interests, and I figure down the line if anything gets weird I'll have built a small tribe of people who are able to hunt, trap and fish.
One thing I've come to notice, even in my smaller town in way northern Alberta; the average dude, has no idea how to hunt, fish, or trap. Killing is easy enough, but it's always the after part. Now you've killed it. How do you make that into food? Hell, most guys that can hunt even take their game to a butcher, so even though they may have the skill to get game, actually processing it is lost on them.
Ultimately, most people have no idea how to get food, so they'll inevitably rob, steal, scam, trade, or die. So I believe game numbers and availability won't be an issue if things ever get that bad.
LargeMobOfMurderers@reddit
But won't that mean that animal and fish numbers will plummet even harder? You'll have large amounts of people killing all the animals, barely getting any food from them due to lack of knowledge on how to process them, and then they'll respond by just continuing to kill more.
No_Space_for_life@reddit
No, because if they're barely getting any food from their kills, then they're getting weaker every time.
A great show on this is "Alone." it's filmed mostly on Vancouver Island, where i grew up. The individuals in the late stages are usually medically disqualified as they slowly suffer from a war of attrition.
They're limited on food, so they're hungry. They catch/kill something that helps them reduce their calorie deficit slightly, but it's almost never enough to fully get into a surplus again. Repeat until they're too exhausted physically from a lack of food to be able to hunt, fish, or forage. Without a safety team pulling them out, they'd die.
Usually, this stage is happening by month 2, and leading into month 3, and keep in mind that most of these individuals are reasonably to highly competent in survival.
A caveat is that some species they're not allowed to target due to local laws, so if you imagine individuals would be able to target those species in a total collapse, you'd maybe draw that timeframe out to 3-5 months for some people and far less for others who have no idea how to do anything at all.
SundaePuzzleheaded30@reddit
I love to watch those shows. Most times if they are alone, yes they quit at some point. That emphasizes the need for some sort of community of people with different skill sets.
thefedfox64@reddit
Nah, people get sick and die from it. Lord knows in SHTF those lovely wasting diseases spreading
357-Magnum-CCW@reddit
Like that guy from that biopic movie who tried to survive in Alaska but ultimately starved to death.
He managed to shoot a deer in the early days by sheer luck, but didn't know how to preserve the meat. So most of it began to rot before he could eat.
In the end he starved by trying to sustain himself on berries alone.
No_Space_for_life@reddit
Ah yes, into the wild, I believe, is the book on that individual. He mistook a plant in his book for another species that looked nearly identical.
The one he could eat was only slightly different, where the poison plant forced his stomach to stop being able to digest food and water, ultimately forcing diarrhea and death due to dehydration.
Ultimately, that guy likely wouldn't have survived anyway because even though he killed a moose, if he was able to correctly preserve the meat, he'd have almost exclusively high protein, and no fats, which leads to protein poisoning.
It's very important to understand how your body works for energy sources and what makes those sources, so you can diversify your diet.
Uldwick@reddit
He ate the wrong plant, got poisoned, got diarrhea, couldn't cross the river back in the winter and died, good book, great movie (into the wild)
premar16@reddit
Yep! Even some homesteaders send their animals somewhere to be processed probably. That is why butchery is a good skill to have. Can make your own little post civilation shop that many people will be in need of.
KoalaMeth@reddit
A lot of people have no problem finding animals to shoot. Being able to preserve their kills and maximize food yield without electricity (or having their own source of electricity) is where they will run into real issues.
Traditional_Neat_387@reddit
That too, I learned how to do that a few years back (practiced with beef) and holy crap a lot can mess up if you don’t know what your doing, I prob wasted a few pounds WITH the internet and books on how to do it before I got it right
KoalaMeth@reddit
What method were you using? I presume turning meat into jerky is the easiest way to preserve it with primitive materials.
SparrowLikeBird@reddit
Depends on the location.
I, for example, live in the american southwest.
Freshwater fish would run out before game here, because the food fish aren't native anyways, they restock every year.
But, neither would run out, because we have free range cattle all over. We also have tons of big game animals. We have three kinds of deer, four kinds of wild sheep, elk, moose, and bison. Bison can interbreed with cattle and produce fertile offspring, so I would anticipate beefalo taking over.
We also have wild turkey in abundance, canadian geese plentiful enough they should put a bounty on them soon, grouse, pheasants, ducks, and quail. Don't forget skyrats (pigeons and seagulls).
We have jackrabbit, cottontails and hares, prairie dogs, and marmot. In a pinch, bears are food too, and Colorado alone has 20,000 black bears (the more palatable kind apparently - never had it myself). We also have cougars which are apparently veal-like in flavor (freeze for a month first, to kill any parasites). We also have so many coyote that you can hunt them, year round, any method, day or night. Apparently (again, never tried it) coyote tastes like lamb.
Backyard hens' eggs would be a good source of protein for a lot of folks. So would artisan goat cheeses (which every goat soap maker produces on the sly). Lots of folks in my area also farm meat rabbits, with New Zealand X Flemish Giant being popular. Rabbits breed like, well, rabbits.
non meat:
Most of the local agriculture is corn. I would expect that to continue, but be used as feed for humans and animals alike instead of the current 85% of it going to ethanol. Locally, anasazi beans are also a popular staple crop, as are stonefruit and apples. I would expect bean production to go up (and, more specifically, for beans to be planted alongside corn, native style), as well as squash (which are currently grown only for decorative purposes here, that I've seen).
there are a lot of native plants that are edible but not grown in bulk yet, which I expect people would start farming pretty quickly (within the first couple years), especially asparagus, indian potato (a pea variety IIRC), and orache (which is kinda like spinache apparenlty - never tried it). Non natives that grow well here, like purslane, would also thrive and become a good source of ruffiage for humans (too many oxalates for livestock).
premar16@reddit
Yep local farmers could work with people to distrube their excess they are not giving to coporations and proccesing plants anymore. In my area when covid shut a lot of things down a few farmers had a lot of extra potatoes that they couldn't wait to give away. They were setting up small events to give it out or allowing people to come pick the plants so it didn't rot in the field. Same with apples. Local farmers markets also helped with distrubution since they already have relationships with local growers and farmers
fastowl76@reddit
I have seen population estimates of white tail deer in the US around 34-35 million, similar to levels 300 years ago. I have also seen estimates that the population plummeted to about 1/2 million during the depression.
Things obviously have changed over the last nearly 100 years with hunting regulations, the reforestation of the eastern seaboard, and the elimination of the screw worm in Texas and other southern states that allowed for the population recovery. One other item that is of concern is the continued spread of CWD. How well the human population would fair eating infected deer, elk, etc., is another variable in the equation. Needless to say, the wild animal population would get decimated rapidly IMO whether it's game animals or fish. Heck, the armadillo and porcupine populations were crushed in the depression as they were animals that folks could dispatch with a stick.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
I love how people think we will out fish the oceans during a shtf situation.
Do you even know how commercial fishing works lol?
There would be an abundance of fish and game because the few humans that survive will mostly depend on canned/preserved foods and what they grow.
Traditional-Leader54@reddit (OP)
How many people do you think are capable of sailing a sail boat (assuming all gas has been depleted or gone bad) to get to the fish in the open ocean?
Also I was mostly thinking about freshwater fish since I’m 90 miles from the ocean.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
Wouldn't even need a boat.
And fresh water fish the same thing their biggest predator by far will be mostly gone less pollution and probably more bugs/plants to the food table.
iwannaddr2afi@reddit
Eh, depends on how collapsed the biosphere already is, how collapsed fish colonies already are, and if the continued effects of climate change are doing their dirtiest work at that point.
IF full, real societal collapse happens (I'm not saying I want it to), it would be great if wildlife rebounded. However, things are already pretty dire for the flora, fauna, and in many cases I can see, edible fungi, and looking like they're going to get worse even without over-harvesting by humans. :/
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
Honestly we do more harm to those population than a nuclear war ever could.
Tinman5278@reddit
In most places it will be fish depleted first. Mostly because more people are willing to fish and think they know enough to catch a fish. You can have a family of 5 or 6 all fishing together at the same time. They'll try that before they try to hunt game. State without much open space will be without both fish and game within a few weeks either way.
No_Character_5315@reddit
I think lakes and maybe costal species will be fished out quickly but the ocean marine life will make a comeback without commercial fishing vessels and no ship liner traffic deep sea fish will be better off.
Traditional_Neat_387@reddit
Honestly I feel like for coastal it’s gonna be more channels with calmer water such as the Chesapeake bay for example fished out but once you get I’d say 500 yards offshore or less of the Atlantic i feel it would be fine as 1.) people aren’t gonna know the weather as easy if at all until it hits, 2.) gas and diesel will be depleted or bad in a 2 years or less 3.) not many people know how to pilot a craft that can safely be in the ocean father out and it would be reduced to almost exclusively sail only which may be only I’d say less than 10% of the local population not counting the fact it would be almost all sail 4.) if someone did manage to figure it out pulling back in unless you know how to fully sail with no motor it’s gonna be at risk of crashing and there goes the boat you acquired.
victorfencer@reddit
You are absolutely right, the venn diagram of sailboat sailors and commercial fishermen is TINY, there's much more overlap with commercial fishermen and gardening, ironically. We have definitely lost a lot of the skills that comprise the foundation of ocean-going enterprises. With less anthropogenic pressure in "open" waters, aka out of sight of land/ human powered craft, coastal waters will be able to restock much more easily and could probably recover from shore bound pressure. Rivers and lakes are pretty doomed in this scenario. Lots of stuff is stocked these days.
premar16@reddit
This is why community/and civilization reform is important. Not everyone has to be out on the water just people who know what they are doing. Fish market have been a thing for centuries. The ones who know how to actually fish correctlty can go out and get it then barter it with the rest of society for whatever currency is made in that time.
Wilyhound7@reddit
This is accurate….in a true grid down situation for an extended period of time, land animals will be depleted fairly quickly. Coastal waters will be overfished but ocean life as a whole will repopulate very quickly. Check out what happened to the sea turtle population when people stopped going to the beaches during Covid. In short: land animals go way down but ocean life will thrive.
No_Character_5315@reddit
I think it also depends where in Canada Alaska land animals might become healthier as a population as hunting them requires trucks and resourced to get to them I live in Canada I know the cost of hunting even now isn't cheap when fuel etc is factored in. I think people will raise livestock like pigs goats chickens.
premar16@reddit
I agree. People seem to overlook that farm animals exist in these scenarios.
Kahlister@reddit
There are lots of stupid comments being upvoted, but yours is both smart and you're making a point that not everyone else is making, and you're being downvoted. Here's an upvote.
Apprehensive_Bit4726@reddit
The comment is being downvoted because the downvoters do lack critical thinking and real world/hunting wild game in very remote and extremely dangerous places (Alaska/Canada) where one mistake can equate to your death. Just my two cents.
thefedfox64@reddit
I disagree, for starters projections, to link population starvation at 3 months - something like 75% of our population. Breaking down the metrics, 34% of the US is above 65+, and 28% live alone. 47% of the above 65+ are single females (widowed and whatnot). That's a huge number of people dying off relatively quickly. We really have 1 season before such a mass starvation that we'd see fish populations explode in size. Mainly because people wouldn't be fishing them. But this is inclusive of the US, so cod fishers or lobster fishes etc etc, are just finite. Maybe locally fishing would decrease, but overall, it would increase dramatically. And I feel like we forgot the horrific wild pig population of the south. That not only will explode but shift so far north my asshole hurts just thinking about it
Tractor-Rider@reddit
If you are "fishing" to stay alive in a SHTF scenario, you need to be able to multittask, unless fish are in abundance. I'm guessing nets or trot lines.
VA3FOJ@reddit
uh tbh i think humans will deplete first before either of these things. the great majority of people would starve if they couldnt get their food from an app or a grocery store because they have no idea how or where to get food
jacksraging_bileduct@reddit
They would kill each other over what food there was.
Starvation really isn’t the threat imo, it’s the people that are left fighting for what’s left.
Educational-Act2454@reddit
There’s people that don’t know how to cook. Like at all.
Downtown-Side-3010@reddit
Exactly my thoughts
AdministrationOk1083@reddit
Deere are pretty depleted here at the best of times. I live on the great lakes, I assume the lake would be mostly ok for a while
Foragologist@reddit
Where at? Southern MI and they are begging people to shoot doe this year. $5 a tag.
AdministrationOk1083@reddit
When I was a kid you'd see 100+ herded up in a corn field in November. Now most crews that used to tag out might fill half their tags.
chris782@reddit
Whitetail deer populations have been so well managed in the US in the last 100 years we're at pre European contact levels. And we have about half the hunters now than 50 years ago. We just got done with a new early antlerless season is MO and can use crossbows during archery now. If anything the great lakes region is booming with deer now.
Foragologist@reddit
Our local body shop has a monthly drawing anyone who's car is getting body work on due to hitting a deer gets put into. Winner gets $1000 and a T shirt.
dqrules11@reddit
In NYS we have a severe deer overpopulation problem.
ommnian@reddit
I don't know of anywhere in north America that there aren't more deer than can be sustained without hunting.
Drake__Mallard@reddit
My locality is certainly overpopulated with deer. That being said, they'll be gone real quick in any global SHTF scenario.
Vault13dweller001@reddit
Yes ... It would be based on the carrying capacity of the region.
Cyanidedelirium@reddit
Game would go idont think fish would go maybe fresh water but saltwater is just to vast to be fished to to extinction in a world where we arent commercially fishing it and hunting isnt sustainable long term especially for large groups even with people dying off
for example california where 51 % of it is public land has a deer pop of 470k lets say 90% of the human pop dies day 1 leaving 3.5mil in ca and they all trying to hunt 5% are successful 3 times thats 525k animals basically all medium amd large game in the state gone in a matter of months
agriculture is what took humans out of the small groups of hunter gathers to villages and cities a strong understanding of agriculture, horticulture and animal husbandry will be necessary for any long term shtf situation
Extra_Comfortable812@reddit
I think as much as half the human population would deplete, due to lack of hunting and fishing knowledge. Then, you need to look at other possibilities of proteins.
premar16@reddit
I would think people would turn to farmers who raise and breed farm animals (cows,goats,chickens,pigs,etc) first since we have moved past the hunter/gather stage into agriculture.
Bald-Bull509@reddit
Game population. But with chronic wasting disease out here in the west the deer population is even smaller. You can’t eat that stuff right?
It_is_Fries_No_Patat@reddit
I'm going sinister here but Haiti showed us that people go cannibalistic in a REAL SHTF situation.
People are crazy under stress.
ProbablyABore@reddit
Being civilized goes out the window in a hurry when that belly is a rumbling. Hoards of hangry people looking at you like you're an oat meal creme pie.
alexandria3142@reddit
I’m hoping to start doing fasts at some point in time. Doesn’t help with other people trying to kill me, but I’ll at least know I can go a day or two not eating, maybe longer. 24 hours isn’t that bad the days I’ve done it, actively doing stuff keeps your mind off food. and I normally fast for 16-18 hours everyday
Guy-with-garden@reddit
Game, if the fish is in the ocean.
With all industrial trawlers and the like not fishing from the ocean and assuming the reason for the shtf do not kill off the fish then that will be a given sorce for ages.
Obviously if your fish is from rivers, streams or lakes it can be depleted before game, but that is higly dependant on local conditions and impossible to answer in a post like this.
Frankly safest access to meat after shtf is actually breeder pigs/rabbits/whatever livestock you have. Alot more reliable then hunting for game if you have the ability to grow the feed aswell your own food.
OnTheEdgeOfFreedom@reddit
Depends on what people are most familiar with in the area. Some areas have a lot of hunting already, and people will try their hand at that. Especially since as far as I know, a diet heavy in fish isn't sustainable; the calories just aren't there.
But it's moot. Both will be depleted in a matter of weeks and it scarcely matters which runs out first. In your total collapse scenario, the US in particular goes from having a surfeit of food to being unable to get anywhere close to providing for the existing population; hunting, fishing and farming isn't sufficient, so within weeks people are going after each other's stocks of food.
I suppose, in a sense, that means "hunting" will last the longest, if you'd think about it, and I'd rather not.
chris782@reddit
A diet heavy in fish isn't sustainable? There are many people/cultures today that subsist primarily on fish.
OnTheEdgeOfFreedom@reddit
I've been advised not to try it, as there are problems with calories and some nutrients. I'm sure there are cultures who worked out solutions to those problems long ago, but that's not likely to apply to some person in the OP's mythical collapse who's suddenly finding the supermarket closed and steals a fishing rod.
I mean that's the problem with collapse in general. 90% of the US population doesn't know what to do if the supermarkets close. There are solutions that will work if you have some years of bushcraft under your belt, but most people will fail to bag game, or overhunt, or eat the wrong thing, fail to cook it properly, choke on bones on whatever. The time to become a survivalist isn't day one of nuclear war or whatever OP needs for his collapse dream.
chris782@reddit
Idk everyone seems to forget that we're like the most intelligent and adaptable thing to exist as far as we know. Yea lots more people would die and things would take time to balance out but we literaly evolved to be hunter gatherers. With all the shit out there now it would be the easiest it has ever been to live like that. A lot more people would figure it out quicker than most wanna admit, cause it's not that hard honestly.
workmyassoff707@reddit
People will get unalived first. Those who did not feel the need to prepare will be deleted by those who did prepare. We will preserve our section of wildlife for our needs.
actualsysadmin@reddit
Fish breed a lot faster than game can turn to adulthood so I’m saying game.
There’s also a lot more fish per sqft of water.
Smooth-Operation4018@reddit
There's gonna be a lot of deer that die and are never recovered because they got gut shot and ran off
CarnivoreMedia@reddit
What are you depending on for your long term plan, if not fish and game?
Traditional-Leader54@reddit (OP)
Farming and raising chickens and rabbits. Not hunting wild game.
NoEquipment1834@reddit
I would say game as lots of it will go to waste. People don’t know how to butcher, process or prepare it for storage so most of what is harvested will likely rot. A single Fish produce less meat but it would generally be in a manageable quantity that would be eaten in a day or so by most families.
Just my thoughts
BigBlueWookiee@reddit
Depends on the cause of the collapse. If its something pollution related - the amount of fish in the sea, rivers, lakes may plummet immediately.
takemeout2dinner@reddit
Per my great grandfather, when turkeys , foxes, deer started gaining in numbers in the 90s it was a big deal. He said they were all about hunted out during the great depression. He told me he hadn't seen a turkey in 25 years. He also told me a story about 1 winter were he was blocked in his cabin by the Ohio river and lived off over 90 rabbits he caught with a snare trap.
Traditional_Neat_387@reddit
Also gotta think how many people actually own guns in your general area also. only 22% according to google own guns across the US as a whole, according to pewresearch.org a survey from 2017 they found that only 62% of gun owners own a rifle, and 52% owned a shotgun (not gonna take down a deer or larger game efficiently with a pistol) which half of those people statistically are over the age of 50, not saying 50+ can’t survive but odds are reduced especially when there’s no gasoline for vehicles. From this I’d say about 9-14% of the population MIGHT be able to successfully hunt repeatedly, this isn’t accounting for those in cities owning and usage amount of the gun/or if they are disabled in any way, also assuming something doesn’t happen to a chunk of them. But google will also tell you there was 15.9 million register hunters in 2023. Of the of the 72 million have some type of hunting experience recently (I know there are exceptions but let’s say 20 million) but off that that’s still only 15.56%(assuming 334 million Americans) that would likely hunt
ProbablyABore@reddit
In America? Humanity.
Most Americans aren't capable of hunting efficiently, and even if they got something they wouldn't know what to do with it. Most people would be more interested in scavenging or trying to take what you have instead of building their own.
Frequent-Ad-116@reddit
Game
Traditional_Neat_387@reddit
Honestly it depends on a lot of factors, small lakes under 10 acres fed by a small stream most definitely quickly, something like the ocean or Great Lakes not so likely depleted so quickly, forests depend a lot on other factors like size, food sources for animals, population of people using the area, ect. Now if we broadened game as anything edible regardless of what it is besides human id still say water IF it’s a very very large body (talking like lake of the ozarks, devils lake, lake mead, Truman reservoir, lake Livingston, Yellowstone lake, or similar sized bodies might hold out long enough for the human population to drop enough.
coriolisagency@reddit
I’m never deleting this app 🤣
Murphy1aw@reddit
In total collapse, the fish will thrive. With commercial fishing off the table, refined fuel becoming less and less available, most fishing for food will be land based or take place close to shore, allowing fish populations to regenerate.
mmaalex@reddit
Most humans will be gone first before fish or game.
Long term a lot of fish are grown in hatcheries and stocked in a lot of areas. Where I'm at in New England most Coldwater game fish (trout, etc) are stocked, so once those aren't being stocked they'll be gone within a few years whether or not anyone catches them. Warm water species like Bass tend to reproduce on their own.
PineapplePza766@reddit
Pets(not kidding), People, small Animals, big game, fish even self proclaimed “hunters” are not good enough to know how to hunt and fish and preserve to sustain themselves long term they use fancy equipment like fish finders, way too many bullets, dogs, guides, calls, scopes, only hunt in open areas, don’t know how to track a bleeding animal etc. etc. etc.
AffectionateSteak588@reddit
It really depends on location. My grandparents live in a town with only maybe 400 people in a 100 square mile area. Extremely rural and heavily forested areas like this will probably not see that much game/fish drop off due to the fact that in a total collapse the human population will drop off dramatically and there is a far greater number of game/fish than humans in the area.
Jammer521@reddit
lots of places where the population is sparse, neither game or fish will run out, lots more people will die, and their will still be lots of chickens, pigs, and cattle, the US has over 500 million chickens alone, 35 million deer, ducks, geese, etc. maybe locally the game might be scarce but if you venture out there should be plenty
Legitimate_Mobile337@reddit
In the south we got so many hogs for everyone, they literally tear up the ground at my damn front door
lazybeekeeper@reddit
Total collapse a lot of folks are probably gonna be in a serious danger of dying to exposure, common illness, or being preyed upon by other people over starving. At least at first, and assuming it’s a global thing, I assume fish will bounce back barring natural disasters. Not a fear I have outside of ensuring proper nutrition and other resources. Food is always there in some form or another historically. Just gotta be versatile and adaptable for it.
Sirspeedy77@reddit
Commercial fisheries would cease to exist, almost instantly. Leading to an immediate rebound in almost everything in the ocean. I mean, everything will still be fished for - just not on an industrial scale like we currently are doing.
Overland game on the other hand will see immediate declines in population due to people killing anything and everything to keep from starving. Over the course of 1-5 years game populations will rebound as people die off and more acreage becomes available for them to inhabit, hide and flourish in.
mad_method_man@reddit
it depends on your current local ecology and migration patterns of food
if you live near the coast, if there was a human civilization collapse in a few years you might have a lot of fish, since wildlife will creep into civilization, if left unchecked. so i would say, it would probably look pretty good for a few years, without proper wildlife management
of course, pollution and other things can affect wildlife population, so if there are some leaky tankers near your water source, you're going to have more issues with the water than with eating local fish
tianavitoli@reddit
can you articulate the circumstances or is just the typical vague "well like everything is gone except the people and all of the animals for some reason"
KoalaMeth@reddit
Yeah some prepper hypotheticals pretend as if the military/gov will just vanish and wouldn't be involved in food aid or resource capture to some major extent
tianavitoli@reddit
i guess once you elevate to a certain level of preparedness you need practical solutions to the imaginary problems that might arise.
KoalaMeth@reddit
Practical solutions to imaginary problems are impractical solutions. At that point I'd just stop prepping and maintain preps for what I reasonably expect to encounter.
TheGreatSickNasty@reddit
Game will get pushed far out first. Fish will deplete soon after.
this_guy_here_says@reddit
Under a total collapse the animal populations would thrive , with no fuel being pulled from the ground we would be forced to hunt and gather in a much smaller radius , the animals would migrate away from us and we would starve
WangusRex@reddit
I think most likely there may be a small dip in fish or game populations at first when the relatively small number of people who know how to get them do so with impunity to feed their families and friends. Very quickly though enough people would die and the previously overcrowded and developed open spaces would allow game populations to thrive. Fish might still get over fished though.
xander328@reddit
Yeah my thoughts, too. I’d think wildlife would actually grow. People die. Not enough can fend for themselves to deplete game or fish.
smellswhenwet@reddit
I’m out elk hunting now and it can be very difficult.
Barbarian_Sam@reddit
Depending on your state the population would probably be cut down to 1/2 to 1/3 of what it was within 2 months so it really wouldn’t be depleted.
AdditionalAd9794@reddit
Deer, turkey and pig seem to be pretty over populated near me. I think the notion they will be hunted to extinction is overblown. It's only going to be the suburbs adjacent animals that get wiped out. As in shtf people/hunters who aren't already in the wilderness will no longer have the ability to reach the wilderness.
All the deer carcasses you see daily on the side of the road on back country roads will no longer be threatened by traffic.
The only way I believe we see a significant dip in population is if something shtf or human caused sees predator population explode or disease spread uncontrollable among game animals
Maximum_Swordfish_51@reddit
Assuming this is the US, game would go first. Many more people have firearms than access to bodies of water.