[[email protected]]

Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

Michael

[Jules Richardson]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 10:31:25 -0700, hanrahan398 wrote:

Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

What do you mean by self-sufficient? As you mention no livestock, do you
just mean growing own veggies? What about heating / power / water - do
you intend to handle those yourself too?

[nightjar]

wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Yes. They are called smallholdings.

http://www.greenshifters.co.uk/for_sale
http://www.thesmallholdingcentre.co.uk/

Colin Bignell

[Ron Lowe[_3_]]

On 03/06/2010 18:31, wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

Michael

I've often noticed a small, green-mould covered caravan on the A939
somewhere about 10 miles out of Tomintoul.

The land around looks a little rugged, and you'd probably be cut off
from November to March. Mutton is nice.

But I'd imagine they'd be open to offers under £300k.


--
Ron

[David WE Roberts[_2_]]

X-post to uk.rec.gardening who are perhaps more likely to be expert in this
subject.

wrote in message
...
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4 acres to
fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the land.
I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and bees (assuming
you regard these as livestock).

AFAIK you can use all your garden to grow food without requiring any
permission, so I presume the basic question is 'where can I get a house and
two or more acres of land for under £300K'.

If you want a wide range of growing conditions you will need to be fairly
well south, which will push the price up.
Scotland can be cheaper but you have a restricted growing season.

Lincolnshire, perhaps?

HTH

Dave R

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

Michael


Highlanmds and islands. But realistically, you wont be able to do that
anywhere.

At some level you need to store veggie over the winter. That means
pickling or freezing or bottling, all of which require industrial use up
the line, as does the very house you will live in. Not to mention the
steel tools you will need.

And you need at least 5-10 acres for woodland to heat the house.

Land is not expensive. Agricultural land is 1500-5000 an acre depending
on what its good for. Woodland/moorland is a lot less.

And of course after 2 years of crofting, you will probably kill yourself.

No one in the UK lives sustainably or self sufficiently. with a sort of
iron age population of around 500,000 it might be possible.

[[email protected]]

On Jun 3, 7:08*pm, Owain wrote:
On 3 June, 18:31, wrote:

Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Scotland! And quite large chunks of Wales too.

North of Scotland - done that. Some of the Scottish islands remain on
the list, but for family reasons I'd prefer somewhere less than about
400 miles from London.

People have recommended North Devon, and parts of Wales as you say. I
haven't looked properly at Wales yet and only know bits of the country
which I've always found extremely variegated. Around Carmarthen is
favourite out of the bits I know. Other recommendations include parts
of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Lincolnshire as has also been
mentioned here. I wonder whether Shropshire or Staffordshire should
also go on the list.

Michael

[[email protected]]

On Jun 3, 8:10*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,

wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

Surbiton. Although they had to make do with just the garden, a goat, and
some pigs.

When that was on the telly for the first time (1975-78) was about the
time I last watched telly!

Michael

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

David WE Roberts wrote:
X-post to uk.rec.gardening who are perhaps more likely to be expert in
this subject.

wrote in message
...
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4 acres
to fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the land.
I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and bees
(assuming you regard these as livestock).

AFAIK you can use all your garden to grow food without requiring any
permission, so I presume the basic question is 'where can I get a house
and two or more acres of land for under £300K'.

If you want a wide range of growing conditions you will need to be
fairly well south, which will push the price up.
Scotland can be cheaper but you have a restricted growing season.

Lincolnshire, perhaps?


plenty of em in east anglia.


HTH

Dave R

[Tim Watts]

On 03/06/10 18:58, David WE Roberts wrote:
X-post to uk.rec.gardening who are perhaps more likely to be expert in
this subject.

wrote in message
...
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4 acres
to fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the land.
I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and bees
(assuming you regard these as livestock).

AFAIK you can use all your garden to grow food without requiring any
permission, so I presume the basic question is 'where can I get a house
and two or more acres of land for under £300K'.


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

--
Tim Watts

Hung parliament? Rather have a hanged parliament.

[[email protected]]

On 3 June, 20:44, wrote:
On Jun 3, 7:08*pm, Owain wrote:

On 3 June, 18:31, wrote:

Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Scotland! And quite large chunks of Wales too.

North of Scotland - done that. Some of the Scottish islands remain on
the list, but for family reasons I'd prefer somewhere less than about
400 miles from London.

People have recommended North Devon, and parts of Wales as you say. I
haven't looked properly at Wales yet and only know bits of the country
which I've always found extremely variegated. Around Carmarthen is
favourite out of the bits I know. Other recommendations include parts
of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Lincolnshire as has also been
mentioned here. I wonder whether Shropshire or Staffordshire should
also go on the list.

Michael

Look at the fens.

Some of the best land in the UK for arable crop yields - and remote
parts are still relatively inexpensive.

Will you have an income? How will you pay for utilities/council tax/
vehicles/FUEL/etc?

[Jules Richardson]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:58:36 +0100, David WE Roberts wrote:
I would have thought you
might to keep at least chickens and bees (assuming you regard these as
livestock).

Have you ever tried herding bees!? ;-)

[Frank Erskine]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

On 03/06/10 18:58, David WE Roberts wrote:
X-post to uk.rec.gardening who are perhaps more likely to be expert in
this subject.

wrote in message
...
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4 acres
to fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the land.
I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and bees
(assuming you regard these as livestock).

AFAIK you can use all your garden to grow food without requiring any
permission, so I presume the basic question is 'where can I get a house
and two or more acres of land for under £300K'.


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.

--
Frank Erskine

[pete]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:08:29 -0700 (PDT), Owain wrote:
On 3 June, 18:31, wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Scotland! And quite large chunks of Wales too.

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

You can get a smallholding with 2 houses and 55 acres for offers over
£280k between Thurso and Wick.

http://www.caithnessproperty.co.uk/a...ALCRO,%20BOWER

Get some B&B guests and some rare breed pigs/sheep and you'd be set
up. Probably wouldn't get much return on your capital of course, but
you wouldn't starve.

Yes, it's important to realise that no matter what proortion of your
own food you source, you'll still need hard cash. Apart from the taxes
you'll have to pay (incl. maybe metered water - it's surprising how
much water you'd need to irrigate crops), you'll need transport, clothes
energy, etc.
So apart from feeding yourself, you'll need enough land for a cash crop
if you're planning on being truly self-sufficient for all your other needs,
too.

[geoff]

In message
,
writes
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

I just lost out (sold behind my back) on an 11 acre farm with
outbuildings and stables which failed to meet the £300,000 reserve at
auction

If you are willing to put in a bit of work, this had a guide price of
£275,000


http://www.primelocation.com/interna...s/id/mcnt53780
32/&utm_campaign=rss-propertyalerts&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=propertya le
rt&utm_campaign=rss-propertyalerts&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=propertya ler
t

if you can't see it type penstrowed hall into google



--
geoff

[Tim Watts]

On 03/06/10 22:42, Frank Erskine wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim wrote:


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.


Yes, but I think that's going to be hard to be fully (or is the OP after
*mostly*) self sufficent without. You really need dairy even if you
don't eat the cow (well, not until it's getting past it). I suppose a
goat would be an more manageable option for milk. And I can't see how
you could survive without some hens (eggs and meat).



--
Tim Watts

Hung parliament? Rather have a hanged parliament.

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

pete wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:08:29 -0700 (PDT), Owain wrote:
On 3 June, 18:31, wrote:
Where in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?
Scotland! And quite large chunks of Wales too.

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?
You can get a smallholding with 2 houses and 55 acres for offers over
£280k between Thurso and Wick.

http://www.caithnessproperty.co.uk/a...ALCRO,%20BOWER

Get some B&B guests and some rare breed pigs/sheep and you'd be set
up. Probably wouldn't get much return on your capital of course, but
you wouldn't starve.

Yes, it's important to realise that no matter what proortion of your
own food you source, you'll still need hard cash. Apart from the taxes
you'll have to pay (incl. maybe metered water - it's surprising how
much water you'd need to irrigate crops), you'll need transport, clothes
energy, etc.
So apart from feeding yourself, you'll need enough land for a cash crop
if you're planning on being truly self-sufficient for all your other needs,
too.

which makes the whole thing pretty meaningless.

If you want to be a net producer of wealth, buy a farm and do the job
properly.

Otherwise live in cardboard city and beg.

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

Tim Watts wrote:
On 03/06/10 22:42, Frank Erskine wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim wrote:


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.


Yes, but I think that's going to be hard to be fully (or is the OP after
*mostly*) self sufficent without. You really need dairy even if you
don't eat the cow (well, not until it's getting past it). I suppose a
goat would be an more manageable option for milk. And I can't see how
you could survive without some hens (eggs and meat).



shot the friggin deer and bunnies?

grow soya beans?

[OG]

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 03/06/10 22:42, Frank Erskine wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim wrote:


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.


Yes, but I think that's going to be hard to be fully (or is the OP after
*mostly*) self sufficent without. You really need dairy even if you don't
eat the cow (well, not until it's getting past it). I suppose a goat would
be an more manageable option for milk. And I can't see how you could
survive without some hens (eggs and meat).


In my cousin's experience, you get the eggs until the fox gets the meat. :-(

[Janet Tweedy]

In article , Tim Watts
writes
Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further
ado. Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible
either.

--
Tim Watts


You can't keep chickens just anywhere. In my land registration thingy it
says no chickens or words to that effect.

Janet
--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

[Tim Watts]

On 04/06/10 00:46, Janet Tweedy wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
writes
Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further
ado. Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible
either.

--
Tim Watts


You can't keep chickens just anywhere. In my land registration thingy it
says no chickens or words to that effect.

Janet

That sounds like a covenant restriction rather than the general case.
I've got one that says "no caravans", but in general people can keep a
caravan.

--
Tim Watts

Hung parliament? Rather have a hanged parliament.

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

OG wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 03/06/10 22:42, Frank Erskine wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim wrote:
Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.
I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.

Yes, but I think that's going to be hard to be fully (or is the OP after
*mostly*) self sufficent without. You really need dairy even if you don't
eat the cow (well, not until it's getting past it). I suppose a goat would
be an more manageable option for milk. And I can't see how you could
survive without some hens (eggs and meat).


In my cousin's experience, you get the eggs until the fox gets the meat. :-(


until you buy the factory made energy intensive shotgun, or chicken wire.

[js.b1]

Define self sufficiency?
Self sufficiency must be farming & must be a commercial business with
ongoing profit & loss because you need to average out to achieve
"evens" - the whole point of "The Good Life" :-)

Define what the objective really is.
I suspect a B&B in France is likely to be more viable as a "self-
sufficient lifestyle" (try farming with arthritis). Alternatively
Bulgaria probably offers very low overheads for living - no
restrictions on foreign property ownership unlike India, and I suspect
taxation is very low.

If this is "retire on 300k" that is not a problem in many countries -
your problem will be maximising return (income) on the 300k whilst
minimising risk, and that will necessitate a very global multi-asset
perspective to counter real world inflation. A bank account can be had
yielding 3% or more, but inflation is somewhat above that level and
spending all the income leaves no capital appreciation to maintain
income against inflation.

Think through very carefully, mistakes with capital can be hard to
reverse - life compounds financial liability.

[nightjar]

Janet Tweedy wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
writes
Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further
ado. Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible
either.

--
Tim Watts


You can't keep chickens just anywhere. In my land registration thingy it
says no chickens or words to that effect.

I had one that said no chickens, pigs or travelling fairs and I was not
allowed to make it into a lunatic asylum, but they were all restrictive
covenants on the land, not general restrictions.

Colin Bignell

[nightjar]

David WE Roberts wrote:
....
ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4 acres
to fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the land.
I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and bees
(assuming you regard these as livestock)...

I assumed the no livestock bit implied vegan. Not sure what their view
on bees is though.

Colin Bignell

[[email protected]]

On Jun 3, 11:29*pm, geoff wrote:
In message
,
writesWhere in the UK can you buy a piece of land of around 2-3 acres with a
house on it, where you can be self-sufficient, i.e. farm the land non-
commercially for your own family's needs only (without keeping any
livestock), without breaking any regulations or requiring permission?

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

I just lost out *(sold behind my back) on an 11 acre farm with
outbuildings and stables which failed to meet the £300,000 reserve at
auction

If you are willing to put in a bit of work, this had a guide price of
£275,000

if you can't see it type penstrowed hall into google

Interesting - thanks for this. Bigger than I need - both the house and
the land area. Very nice looking, at that price. Sorry you lost out!
Did you view it? What kind of state was the house in?

Best,

Michael

[Bruce[_8_]]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 17:32:09 -0700 (PDT), "js.b1"
wrote:

Define self sufficiency?
Self sufficiency must be farming & must be a commercial business with
ongoing profit & loss because you need to average out to achieve
"evens" - the whole point of "The Good Life" :-)

Define what the objective really is.
I suspect a B&B in France is likely to be more viable as a "self-
sufficient lifestyle" (try farming with arthritis). Alternatively
Bulgaria probably offers very low overheads for living - no
restrictions on foreign property ownership unlike India, and I suspect
taxation is very low.

If this is "retire on 300k" that is not a problem in many countries -
your problem will be maximising return (income) on the 300k whilst
minimising risk, and that will necessitate a very global multi-asset
perspective to counter real world inflation. A bank account can be had
yielding 3% or more, but inflation is somewhat above that level and
spending all the income leaves no capital appreciation to maintain
income against inflation.

Think through very carefully, mistakes with capital can be hard to
reverse - life compounds financial liability.


All very good points, and well made. But you are asking the OP to let
his head rule his heart, when his idea of 'self sufficiency' more
closely resembles his heart ruling his head.

I'm not sure that it is possible to find a compromise between these
two diametrically opposite approaches.

[Bruce[_8_]]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 23:36:56 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:
On 03/06/10 22:42, Frank Erskine wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:16:11 +0100, Tim wrote:


Of course You can also keep chickens and rabbits without further ado.
Pigs, sheep, etc require a license, but that's not impossible either.

I think the OP said that he didn't intend to keep livestock.


Yes, but I think that's going to be hard to be fully (or is the OP after
*mostly*) self sufficent without. You really need dairy even if you
don't eat the cow (well, not until it's getting past it). I suppose a
goat would be an more manageable option for milk. And I can't see how
you could survive without some hens (eggs and meat).


Perhaps the OP and/or his loved ones are vegetarian or vegan? He
seemed very firm in his first posting about no livestock.

Being a vegan isn't easy. I married someone strictly vegetarian who
is keen to go vegan, so I know. But many people seem to achieve a
dairy-free diet quite successfully. I couldn't do it, and it seems as
though you probably couldn't either, but the fact is that many do.

It really isn't up to us to judge what other people do or don't eat. I
don't like being put under pressure *not* to eat certain foods, and I
know that others don't like being pressured by society into eating
things that they don't believe people should eat.

[Tim Watts]

On 04/06/10 11:26, Bruce wrote:

It really isn't up to us to judge what other people do or don't eat. I
don't like being put under pressure *not* to eat certain foods, and I
know that others don't like being pressured by society into eating
things that they don't believe people should eat.


I wasn't judging him, just questioning the practicalities. TNP said soya
beans - I don't honestly know if that's enough. I thought nuts were par
for the course of being a vegan too???

Chickens are usually high of the list of a truely self sufficient
lifestyle because: they're fairly easy (apart from keeping foxes off
them); they eat lots of kitchen waste; they produce 2 useful products.

Cows OTOH would be a nightmare. When the inevetible happens, having to
kill it and process that much meat in one go would be a serious
undertaking. If it were me, I'd probably develop a liking for goats or
sheeps milk at that point(!)

--
Tim Watts

Hung parliament? Rather have a hanged parliament.

[Allthumbs]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 10:31:25 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Is there anywhere where you can get this for less than say 300K?

you should be alright anywhere away from commuters, the Lake district
or the coast

How about this:-
"http://www.primelocation.com/uk-property-for-sale/details/id/CARD1400734/"
--
Mike

[[email protected]]

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 04/06/10 11:26, Bruce wrote:
It really isn't up to us to judge what other people do or don't eat. I
don't like being put under pressure *not* to eat certain foods, and I
know that others don't like being pressured by society into eating
things that they don't believe people should eat.

I wasn't judging him, just questioning the practicalities. TNP said soya
beans - I don't honestly know if that's enough. I thought nuts were par
for the course of being a vegan too???

It's not. Nor are nuts+soya. Veganism is as unnatural as the steak
diet so popular with other people, and it's extremely hard to avoid
malnutrition. In particular, B12 deficiency is a serious risk, so
supplements are needed. See, for example, "Dietary Sources" in:

http://www.vegsoc.org/info/b12.html


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

[[email protected]]

On Jun 4, 11:45*am, wrote:

Veganism is as unnatural as the steak
diet so popular with other people, and it's extremely hard to avoid
malnutrition. In particular, B12 deficiency is a serious risk, so
supplements are needed.

Three slices of marmite on toast for breakfast each day give a person
ample B12.

Michael

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:45 am, wrote:

Veganism is as unnatural as the steak
diet so popular with other people, and it's extremely hard to avoid
malnutrition. In particular, B12 deficiency is a serious risk, so
supplements are needed.

Three slices of marmite on toast for breakfast each day give a person
ample B12.


well its a novel way to lose half your friends.

However, how are you going to make this Marmite on your self sufficiency
plot?


Michael

[Stuart Noble]

Bruce wrote:
others don't like being pressured by society into eating
things that they don't believe people should eat.

Broccoli for one

[[email protected]]

On Jun 4, 12:22*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
wrote:

Three slices of marmite on toast for breakfast each day give a person
ample B12.

well its a novel way to lose half your friends.

Just eat what you want to eat, Nat! As long as your table manners are
OK :-)

But getting sufficient B12 is easy for any vegan.

However, how are you going to make this Marmite on your self sufficiency
plot?

OK OK, not total or literal self-sufficiency. But probably what John
Seymour would have classed as it. No plans to stop buying industrially
manufactured toilet paper, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Michael

[Janet Tweedy]

In article , "Nightjar
\"cpb\"@" writes
I had one that said no chickens, pigs or travelling fairs and I was not
allowed to make it into a lunatic asylum,


Oh dear so now URG meets there then?
--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

[[email protected]]

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:

Veganism is as unnatural as the steak
diet so popular with other people, and it's extremely hard to avoid
malnutrition. In particular, B12 deficiency is a serious risk, so
supplements are needed.

Three slices of marmite on toast for breakfast each day give a person
ample B12.

well its a novel way to lose half your friends.

However, how are you going to make this Marmite on your self
sufficiency plot?

It's also a frequently propagated myth - and often propaganda.
According to the manufacturers, that is 1.8 micrograms a day:

http://www.marmite.com/love/nutrition/nutrition.html

They quote an old, now superseded, valud of the RDA. A more modern
figure is 2.4+:

http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/vitaminb12.asp

And a significant but small (1%?) people have problems absorbing
it, and so need more. An ample quantity would be in the range 6-10
micrograms - that's a tablespoonful of Marmite!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

[The Natural Philosopher[_2_]]

wrote:
On Jun 4, 12:22 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
wrote:

Three slices of marmite on toast for breakfast each day give a person
ample B12.
well its a novel way to lose half your friends.

Just eat what you want to eat, Nat! As long as your table manners are
OK :-)

But getting sufficient B12 is easy for any vegan.

However, how are you going to make this Marmite on your self sufficiency
plot?

OK OK, not total or literal self-sufficiency. But probably what John
Seymour would have classed as it. No plans to stop buying industrially
manufactured toilet paper, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Michael

blimey. What's wrong with vegetable oil and slaked lime soap, and a bit
of straw?

Weave your underwear out of nettle stalks suitably stripped.

Nah. My main point is that no one is in this country is remotely able to
be self sufficient, and even pre-industrial farming, is not self sufficient.

The only self sufficient people we have had here are hunter-gatherers,
and they mainly hunted furry things. Not vegetables.

The moment you even do slash and burn agriculture, you introduce
specialisation. A metal worker trades metals for food etc etc.

This is the real myth busting behind all ecological and green eco
bollox. If you want a completely sustainable egalitarian society, this
island can do it, in terms of hunter gathering, at a population of about
100,000.

It can be inegalitarian, but relatively sustainable, with a feudal
system up to about 2 million.

For the rest, there is fossil or nuclear energy.

[Bruce[_8_]]

On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:31:07 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
Bruce wrote:
others don't like being pressured by society into eating
things that they don't believe people should eat.

Broccoli for one


I adore broccoli. I eat it at least three times a week.

But don't ever - EVER - give me cauliflower!

[Ian B[_2_]]

Nightjar "cpb"@" wrote:
David WE Roberts wrote:
...
ISTR my self-sufficiency books said that you needed a minimum of 4
acres to fully rotate crops and feed a family.
They were keeping a pig, though, for meat and for ploughing up the
land. I would have thought you might to keep at least chickens and
bees (assuming you regard these as livestock)...

I assumed the no livestock bit implied vegan. Not sure what their view
on bees is though.

They're not allowed to eat them?


Ian