Would it be possible to survive in middle Europe out of civilization?

if people were starving then millions of people would roam through the woods and shoot any animal they saw, it would not be sustainable hunting

>>801283
This. And most would not know how to dress and butcher the animals. Your best bet would be to make your way to farms that rely on tractors to do most of the work, and offer your services and protection in exchange for a promise of food.

there are still millions of doe, boars and rabbits
not enough for everyone though
one could also live off the annual herring migration at the coasts
people will also be able to do agriculture, eat apples and stuff

in the south-west of England there are a lot of rabbits, hare, deer, some geese, swans - not to mention badgers, foxes, owls, seagulls, pigeons, pheasants, herons - and then there's sea/riverfood.

there are at least some edible wild plants as well. I learned a little about it and was able to see some on my walks: blackberries, puffballs, wood ears, wild garlic.

that's all outside of human agriculture.

>>802008
> believing England has a population sustainable agriculture and doesn't rely on food imports

Wow mate. Tell me how much food England exports or is there a deficit?

File: jeremy-chong-forest1.jpg (795KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 1920x1080px

>Middle of europe
>out of civilization

choose one. The sprawl has completely pushed out native fauna since the 1800s. you couldn't walk more than a few miles before stumbling onto another farm or village. Even your national parks are littered with infrastructure.

>>801283

This.

>Would it be possible to survive in middle Europe out of civilization?

During normal everyday life? Probably, if you know how to hunt/trap/forage.

But when millions of humans attack at once, there won't be anything left to eat - would probably see some cannibalism, too.

>>801280
Europe is too densely populated. Your best bet (only chance in fact) is to offer yourself up as a labourer for room and board to a farmer who can't get gas for his tractor.

>>802104
> only chance

Actually sex workers.will still (and always) habe a chance.

The basic fact is there are too many humans. Without food imports a lagre portion are destined to starve. Period.

This will put a glut of sex workers to market and they will become the absolute lowest class of people.

File: 1457917890071.jpg (3MB, 3319x2212px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3319x2212px

>>801280
Just buy $5000 worth of mountain house if you're worried about something that will most likely not happen.

Honestly I feel the best place to go if shit seriously hits the fan (provided you have requisite skills and experience) would be the taiga forest

>away from what would likely be the source of catastrophe
>people would probably not be inclined to go to such an extreme local so you wouldn't need to worry about other people
>even if they did they would die in the cold before they found you or get lost in the countless woods
>so many trees you would have all the material needed to build a shelter
>can trap for food or even better if near water fish
>a lot of snow which you can melt for easy fresh water
>/out/ as fuck
>once you build your shelter comfy as fuck

File: 1441338995907.jpg (57KB, 600x633px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x633px

It's possible. This is someone who lives in the southeast of bongland, which is quite heavily populated.
1. There are still many forests and hilly land in very rough terrain, thick marsh and brambles and barbed wire everywhere. Lots of "hiddern wildernesses" in small valleys and such.


2. In a SHTF, the people in the cities will get bombed, put in FEMA like camps, and experience civil unrest. Most people will die in a few days, from drinking unfiltered water.


3. Most normal people in the SHTF wouldn't go to a forest and try to go rambo, they would try to go to a safer town. If they think there's a safezone town somewhere, they'll travel there, instead of trying to spend their time in the wilderness, in the elements. Especially in Bongland, in the winter it would be difficult to survive in a makeshift shelter innawoods if you have no experience building one.

4. Farmers would likely shoot anyone who goes onto their land, and farmers have a lot of legal and illegal guns.

>>802845
1. SHTF in bongland, everyone has the same idea to go out to the countryside/woods/hills to try and survive

2. Everyone dies

File: 1525059_796478243796888_2485178960088350105_n.jpg (54KB, 448x750px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 448x750px

>>802852
Read what I posted. Most people would be dead already, or put in government Camps, and most people don't have the idea to go innawoods to survive. Is reading that fucking hard for you to do?

>>802858
1. be you

2. take this way too seriously

File: snafu.png (6KB, 372x314px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 372x314px

>>802891
>being this stupid

>>801280
Ever kicked of an large ant hill?

Now imagine those are humans instead of ants running around. That is how it all country side will look.

>>802896
no but draecunt says the sheeple won't know how to not-city

File: 1464707246375.jpg (48KB, 538x960px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 538x960px

>>802903
>getting this mad
kek

>>802903
And someone like the OP who actually needs to ask the questions he's asking is going to be able to not-city?

Besides, people can live quite a long time in the "wild" with more than enough time to eat all the wildlife and steal all your shit.

>>802592
>most likely not happen.
What makes you so sure? It happened not so long ago in Serbia. There are plenty of things that could happen to cause some terrific changes. Even NASA warend that there could be a massive solar storm by the sun which may destroy all electronics in an continent.