A conversation with an old friend. The Good Death, and the Good Life and Existential Occupations.

A really old friend of mine and I were talking about it just last week.

I had to catch up with him as he was working on something for me.  It was Friday, but I was fairly formally dressed and he noted it. The reason was that I had just come from my uncle's funeral earlier that day.  He extended his sympathies, but I noted that my uncle had lived a long and good life.  Not a life free of troubles, as no such thing existed, but a long life, that was well lived, and he'd remained sharp right up until the end.  His health had declined in recent years, but only in very recent ones.  It was the last few months that were rough.

My friend and I, who first knew each other as National Guardsmen back in the 80s, are co-religious.  Neither of us was married when we first met, but both of us have, and have seen our kids grow up since then.  And of course, we've seen our parents pass away, his before mine.  He has siblings, which I do not, and one of his brothers died, only in his 50s.  I noted that in the Middle Ages, people often prayed for good deaths, and he noted that a prayer group that he's in now does that every week.

Prayer for a Happy Death

O God, great and omnipotent judge of the living and the dead, we are to appear before you after this short life to render an account of our works. Give us the grace to prepare for our last hour by a devout and holy life, and protect us against a sudden and unprovided death. Let us remember our frailty and mortality, that we may always live in the ways of your commandments. Teach us to "watch and pray" (Lk 21:36), that when your summons comes for our departure from this world, we may go forth to meet you, experience a merciful judgment, and rejoice in everlasting happiness. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

I'm constantly amazed by people who work into old age, as I'd judge it, and keeping working.  A dear friend of mine, now in his 70s, noted that just the other day.  He doesn't have to, he just is.  Likewise, I know a collection of lawyers who fit that description.  The law is a hard job, surrounded by hard facts, hard people, and difficult scenarios

I think they just know nothing else, their real personalities, perhaps, burnt to the core eons ago.

In contrast, I'm also constantly amazed by those who have extensive plans for their retirements well before they can retire.  Another friend of mine fits this category, but when I look at him, I can tell his physical condition is so poor it'd be amazing if he lives long enough to retire.  It's one of those things where you don't know what to say.  If you were to be blunt, you'd say that the dreams of early retirement are probably forlorn, but that his dreams of retiring at all may be foreclosed by a bad early death, if some correction isn't made soon, and those corrections are harder to make once you are past your 30s.

The call came to my wife on Saturday.  I could tell from the tone what the topic was, without even being told.  A relative of hers was on his way to the hospital by helicopter.  Even though he was being sent in, in that fashion, I knew, but did not say it, that he'd not make it.  I'm not even sure if he wanted to.

And so another death.

In this case, unlike my uncle, he was much younger.  My age, in fact.  I hadn't seen him for many years, and before his troubles really set in.  He hadn't been able to adjust to them well.  The most common comment from people, none of whom were surprised, was that his torment was over.

I don't have any big plans, like one of my friends, for retirement.  I hope to be healthy, and just become more of an agrarian-killetarian than I presently am.  Funny thing is that recently I've been running into people who claim "you're looking really good". Somebody asked me the other day, indeed at the funeral gathering, "you're working out", the question in the form of a statement.  Not really.

Indeed, I've gained some weight I seemingly just can't lose, which I think is the byproduct of my thyroid medicine, which has made me hungry, and I know that I'm not in the physical condition I was before my recent health troubles commenced.  People close to me just won't accept that, which brings me to the other side of the retirement coin noted above.  Some lawyers I know are already planning for me to work into my 70s, as that's the thing to do, apparently. Long-suffering spouse, for her part, won't say something like that, but from an ag family, she doesn't really accept the concept of retirement anyhow.  Having said that, I wouldn't plan on my retiring from the ag operation either.

It finally occured to me, however, what's different about agricultural jobs as opposed to others, at least if you are an owner of the enterprise or part of it.  The occupation itself is existentially human.  It is, if you will, an Existential Occupation, or at least it is right now. The mindless gerbil like advance of "progress" may ruin that and reduce it to just another occupation.

Existential Occupations are ones that run with our DNA as a species.  Being a farmer/herdsman is almost as deep in us as being a hunter or fisherman, and it stems from the same root in our being.  It's that reason, really, that people who no longer have to go to the field and stream for protein, still do, and it's the reason that people who can buy frozen Brussels sprouts at Riddleys' still grown them on their lots.  And its the reason that people who have never been around livestock will feel, after they get a small lot, that they need a cow, a goat, or chickens.  It's in us.  That's why people don't retire from real agriculture.

It's not the only occupation of that type, we might note.  Clerics are in that category.  Storytellers and Historians are as well.  We've worshiped the Devine since our onset as a species, and we've told stories and kept our history as story the entire time.  They're all existential in nature.  Those who build certain things probably fit into that category as well, as we've always done that.  The fact that people tinker with machinery as a hobby would suggest that it's like that as well.

Indeed, if it's an occupation. . . and also a hobby, that's a good clue that its an Existential Occupation.

If I were to retire from my career, which I can't right now, I wouldn't be one of those people who spend their time traveling to Rome or Paris or wherever.  I have very low interest in doing that.  I'd spend my time writing, fishing, hunting, gardening (and livestock tending).  That probably sounds pretty dull to most people.  I could imagine myself checking our Iceland or Ireland, or fjords in Norway, but I likely never will.

What I can't imagine myself doing is imagining that age and decline don't occur, and that I should be in court in my 70s.  I don't think that the lawyers who do that realize that younger lawyers don't admire that, and most of the lawyers I'm running into in court are younger than me now.  

And indeed, frankly, it isn't admirable.  People who work a hard non-existential job and keep at it into their advanced old age, or at least past their 7th decade, have just lost something they were when they were young, and much of that is themselves.  They've lost who they were.

AN ACT OF FAITH IN ANTICIPATION OF THE HOUR OF DEATH

From the works of St. Pompilio M. Pirrotti

On my journey toward eternity, dear Lord,

 

I am surrounded  by powerful enemies of my soul.

I live in fear and trembling,

especially at the thought of the hour of death,

on which my eternity will depend,

and of the fearful struggle that the devil will then have to wage against me,

knowing that little time is left for him to accomplish my eternal ruin.

I desire, therefore, O Lord,

to prepare myself for it from this hour,

by offering you now, in view of my last hour,

my profession of faith and love for you,

which is so effectual in repressing and rendering useless

all the crafty and wicked schemes of the enemy

and which I resolve to oppose to him at that moment of such grave consequence,

even though he should dare alone to attack with his deceits

the peace and tranquility of my spirit.

I N.N.,

in the presence of the Most Holy Trinity,

the blessed Virgin Mary,

my holy Guardian Angel

and the entire heavenly host,

affirm that I wish to live and die under the standard of the Holy Cross.

I firmly believe all that our Holy Mother,

the holy, catholic and apostolic Church,

believes and teaches.

It is my steadfast intention to die in this holy faith,

in which all the holy martyrs, confessors and virgins of Christ have died,

as well as all those who have saved their souls.

If the devil should tempt me to despair

because of the multitude and grievousness of my sins,

I affirm that from this day forth

I firmly hope in the infinite mercy of God,

which will not let itself be overcome by my sins,

and in the Precious Blood of Jesus

which has washed all my sins away.

If the devil should assail me with temptations to presumption

by reason of the small amount of good

which by the help of God

I may have been able to accomplish,

I confess from this day forth

that I deserve eternal separation from God

a thousand times by my sins

and I entrust myself entirely

to the infinite goodness of God,

through whose grace alone I am what I am.

Finally, if the evil spirit should suggest to me

that the pains inflicted upon me by our Lord

in that last hour of my life

are too heavy to bear,

I affirm now that all will be as nothing

in comparison with the punishments I have deserved throughout life.

In the bitterness of my soul

I call to remembrance all my years;

I see my iniquities, I confess them and detest them.

Ashamed and sorrowful I turn to you,

my God, my Creator and my Redeemer.

Forgive me, O Lord, by the multitude of your mercies;

forgive your servant whom you have redeemed by your Precious Blood.

My God, I turn to you, I call upon you, I trust in you;

 to your infinite goodness

I commit the entire reckoning of my life.

I have sinned greatly, O Lord:

 enter not into judgment with your servant,

who surrenders to you

and confesses his guilt.

Of myself I cannot make satisfaction to you for my countless sins:

I do not have the means to pay you for my infinite debt.

But your Son has shed his Blood for me,

and greater than all mine sins is your mercy.

O Jesus, be my Saviour!

At the hour of my fearful crossing to eternity

put to flight the enemy of my soul;

grant me grace to overcome every difficulty,

for you alone do mighty wonders.

Lord,

according to the multitude of your tender mercies

I shall enter into your dwelling place.

Trusting in your pity,

I commend my spirit into your hands!

May the Blessed Virgin Mary

and my Guardian Angel

accompany my soul into the heavenly country. Amen.

We should all hope and indeed pray for a happy death.  And perhaps we should pray for a happy life, which is one worthwhile.  That doesn't, quite frankly, include the "I'm going to work here at my desk until I die".  That's surrendering to fear or meaningless, in most cases.

Again, there are exceptions.  People with Existential Occupations, people who own their own special business, and the like.  The list can't really be set out in full.

That doesn't include pouring through the latest edition of the IRS code for deductions, or reading the Restatement (Second) of Torts, or engineering an oilfield implement. 

Well that's odd.

Venison meatball day?

Food and Cooking Blogs

• 
  Peak To Plate

  Easy Venison Meatballs - A good venison meatball recipe is something every hunter needs in their repertoire. They're easy to make, versatile, and a great way to use ground veniso...

  1 day ago
• 
  From Field To Plate

  Venison Swedish Meatballs - Walking down the isles of cheap Ikea furniture and your nose gets a whiff of something sweet, creamy and filled with bold spices. like one of those old t...

  1 day ago

Blog Mirror: Locally Procured Wild Game Culinary Trends in the US: A Study of the Ruffed Grouse as Entrée and Accompanying Nutritional Analysis

 

Locally Procured Wild Game Culinary Trends in the US: A Study of the Ruffed Grouse as Entrée and Accompanying Nutritional Analysis

Lex Anteinternet: Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago...A few observations.

A few odds and ends on this story:

Lex Anteinternet: Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago...:   Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel Yup.  And. . .  The early Middle Pleistocene site of Ge...

By most reckonings, the humans, and they were humans, who were grilling up the carp were not members of our species, Homo sapiens.

They likely would have been Homo Heidelbergensis or Homo Erectus, the former having at one time been regarded as a subspecies of the latter.

No matter, these people were a lot closer to you than you might imagine.  Their brain capacity, for one thing, is just about the same as modern humans at 1200 cc.  FWIW, the brain capacity of archaic Homo Sapiens was actually larger than that of current people, members of the species Homo Sapien Sapien. Our current brain sizes are pretty big, in relative terms, at about 1400 cc, although Neanderthals' were bigger, at 1500cc.  

About the "archaic" members of our species, it's been said that they're not regarded their own species as they have been "admitted to membership in our species because of their almost modern-sized brains, but set off as ‘archaic' because of their primitive looking cranial morphology".¹  Having said that, some people say, no, those are Homo Heidlebergensis.  It can be pretty difficult to tell, actually, and as been noted:

One of the greatest challenges facing students of human evolution comes at the tail end of the Homo erectus span. After Homo erectus, there is little consensus about what taxonomic name to give the hominins that have been found. As a result, they are assigned the kitchen-sink label of “archaic Homo sapiens.”

Tattersall (2007) notes that the Kabwe skull bears more than a passing resemblance to one of the most prominent finds in Europe, the Petralona skull from Greece. In turn, as I mentioned above, the Petralona skull is very similar to one of the most complete skulls from Atapuerca, SH 5, and at least somewhat similar to the Arago skull.

Further, it is noted that the Bodo cranium from Africa shares striking similarities to the material from Gran Dolina (such as it is). This suggests that, as was the case with Homo erectus, there is widespread genetic homogeneity in these populations. Given the time depth involved, it is likely that there was considerable and persistent gene flow between them. Tattersall (2007), argues that, since the first example of this hominin form is represented by the Mauer mandible, the taxonomic designation Homo heidelbergensis should be used to designate these forms. This would stretch the limits of this taxon, however, since it would include the later forms from Africa as well. If there was considerable migration and hybridization between these populations, it could be argued that a single taxon makes sense. However, at present, there is no definitive material evidence for such migration, or widespread agreement on calling all these hominins anything other than “archaic Homo sapiens.”²

 Regarding our first ancestors, of our species, appearance:

When comparing Homo erectus, archaic Homo sapiens, and anatomically modern Homo sapiens across several anatomical features, one can see quite clearly that archaic Homo sapiens are intermediate in their physical form. This follows the trends first seen in Homo erectus for some features and in other features having early, less developed forms of traits more clearly seen in modern Homo sapiens. For example, archaic Homo sapiens trended toward less angular and higher skulls than Homo erectus but had skulls notably not as short and globular in shape and with a less developed forehead than anatomically modern Homo sapiens. archaic Homo sapiens had smaller brow ridges and a less-projecting face than Homo erectus and slightly smaller teeth, although incisors and canines were often about as large as that of Homo erectus. Archaic Homo sapiens also had a wider nasal aperture, or opening for the nose, as well as a forward-projecting midfacial region, known as midfacial prognathism. The occipital bone often projected and the cranial bone was of intermediate thickness, somewhat reduced from Homo erectus but not nearly as thin as that of anatomically modern Homo sapiens. The postcrania remained fairly robust, as well. To identify a set of features that is unique to the group archaic Homo sapiens is a challenging task, due to both individual variation—these developments were not all present to the same degree in all individuals—and the transitional nature of their features. Neanderthals will be the exception, as they have several clearly unique traits that make them notably different from modern Homo sapiens as well as their closely related archaic cousins.³

Well, what that tells us overall is that we were undergoing some changes during this period of the Pleistocene, that geologic period lasting from about 2,580,000 to 11,700 years ago.

And that, dear reader, points out that we're a Pleistocene mammal.

It also points out that we don't have yet a really good grasp as to when our species really fully came about.  We think we know what the preceding species was, but we're not super sure when we emerged from it.  And of course, we didn't really emerge, but just kind of rolled along mother and father to children.

Which tells us that Heidlebergensis may have been pretty much like us, really.

Just not as photogenic.

On that, it's also been recently noted that the best explanation for the disappearance of the Neanderthals, which are now widely regarded as a separate species that emerged also from Heidelbergensis disappeared as they just cross bread themselves out of existence.  Apparently they thought our species was hotter than their own.

Assuming they are a separate species, which I frankly doubt.

Here were definitely morphology differences between Heidelbergensis and us, but as we addressed the other day in a different context, everybody has a great, great, great . . . grandmother/grandfather who was one of them.

And another thing.

They ate a lot of meat.

A lot.

I note that as it was in vogue for a while for those adopting an unnatural diet, i.e. vegetarianism, to claim that this is what we were evolved to eat. 

Not hardly.  With huge brains, and cold weather burning up calories, we were, and remain, meat eaters.

Foonotes:

1.  Archaic Homo sapiens  Christopher J. Bae (Associate Professor, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Hawaii-Manoa) © 2013 Nature Education  Citation: Bae, C. J. (2013) . Nature Education Knowledge 4(8):4

2. By  James Kidder, The Rise of Archaic Homo sapiens

3.  11.3: Defining Characteristics of Archaic Homo Sapiens

Snake Oil

Note:  This post was originally written, and then not published, in 2019.  It's actually not finished, and frankly I hesitated to publish it, but I'm putting it up now, as its more or less written.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Charles DeFate, who wasn't an Indian, holding a bottle of Montana Indian Remedies, which weren't Montana Indian remedies.  There's so much wrong in this photo, it's hard to state where they actually begin. Insulting to Indians.  Insulting to Intelligence.  And Insultling to Science. But Americans still buy off on crap like this.

Why do Americans continually fall for such non scientific unadulterated baloney?

Not a day goes buy where I don't get a pile of spam emails that advertise complete crap that's being sold as miracle cures or ways for lazy people to gain health or loose weight.  It's simply amazing.  But then, by the same token, turn on your television during the day time (which I don't really recommend) and you'll be assaulted by the same type of material.

A person would think that, in 2019, with science having advanced so much even since the last mid century, that people would run fleeing from science into complete bogosity, but they do. And the number one way they seem to is in the bogus fad. To given just a few examples, here's a selection of spam email stuff or topics that I receive almost every day:

CBD Oil

"Essential Oils" 

"Fit Freeze Ice Cream" 

"Keto Bread" 

this is truly amazing...
“51-Year-Old Mom Shocks the World When She Loses 42 Lbs Eating ICE CREAM Every Single Day!” 

Who Else Wants To Plug A Wire Into The Ground And Produce Electricity (It's Real)

It's truly reached the complete bullshit level.

Let's start with something that should be obvious.  You, if you are reading this, are a human being.  When exactly our species (homo sapien sapien) got up and running isn't completely clear, but it's a long darned time ago and I have no doubt that archaic members of our species, the Cro Magnon's, were around earlier than we suppose and also, frankly, a lot like more of us than some would like to suppose.

Moreover, we're evolved to fit a pretty wide eco niche, but an eco niche nonetheless.  Almost all of our modern physical and for that matter mental problems are due to our having left what we were evolved to do and that we're occupying a false eco niche that's unhealthy for anyone or anything.

Your DNA expects you, in other words, to be out there (truly out there) doing the things you were evolved to do, an awful lot of which has to do with acquiring the food you are supposed to eat the way you were supposed to eat it.  Mess with that much and you end up overweight and overwrought.

And there isn't much doubt we're both of those things.

In other words, living in a pathetic plastic environment will lead you, pretty soon, to think that somebody like Billie Eilish actually has a point on something and actually is interesting.  She doesn't, and she isn't. She's just a messed up 17 year old.

Don't do that.

That's a mild example, of course. There are a lot more than that.  People who lament our current era in comparison to the past can legitimately state that our society is about as messed up and confused psychologically and morally as it has been at any point since the 1st Century, with it getting more messed up and confused by the day.

Okay, taking that down a bit further, you were evolved to live in a certian environment and eat certain things.  Do that as closely as you can, and you'll be a long ways towards a healthy existance, and a more pleasant one that you might otherwise lead.

Which takes us to  some things that should be obvious.

Ignoring the above, and science, and proceeding with baloney cures and diets isn't going to do anything for you.

Let's start with the fad diet.

At anyone time there's a fad diet going on.  Some of them are more enduring than others, and some actually have some science behind them. A lot don't.

I"m constantly meeting people who are on "clenses" and other pseudiscientific food based pursuits.

Your liver is busy "detoxing" things all the time.  The concepth that if you do this or that you are detoxing your body in some scientific beneficial ways is crap.  That doesn't mean that you should continue to injest stuff that makes your liver work overtime.  You aren't a polar bear, for instance, that has a heavy duty liver going for it.  So you shouldn't be boozing it up every day by any means.

But drinking lime infused cucumber water, or whatever, doesn't do anyting other than put your kidneys to work.  It isn't going to detox a darn thing.  If you feel it is, it's probably because you were on a diet of Ho-Hos and Bud Lite to start with.  Not eating crap and drinking 50 gallons of beer a day is why you might feel better.

Likewise, almost every fad diet really has some serious questions surrounding them.

The fad diet de jure is the Keto Diet, or more properly the Ketogenic Diet.

If you don't know something about Keto, it probably means that you are working at the Starbucks in Jonchon, North Korea and don't get around much, as everyone else in the entire globe has heard of it and, right now, about 75% of the people in the Western world are on it or claiming to be on it.  Basically, the diet is a high fat, portein based, low carbohydrate diet that came about as a treatment for epileptic children who were otherwise hard to treat.  As the diete is low in carbohydrates the body is forced to consume fats rather than the carbohydrates that hte body would normally turn into glucose.  If there aren't very many carbohydrates hanging around the liver is forced into convering fats itno fatty acids and ketone bodies.

That's all well and good, I suppose, for the treatment of epilepsy, but what does it have to do with losing weight?  Well, at least at first, people do.

There are scientific reasons for that, but let's state a couple of obvious oddities first.  The first is that all you are really doing with this, in some ways, is unnaturally replicating what you would pick up with a natural killetarian diet anyhow.

Now, I'll be frank, I'm not in the "red meat will kill you dead" camp by any means.  Indeed, for a vareity of reasons we're heavy on meat consumption in this house anyhow.  I have another thread lingering in the  hopper on this topic.  But I'm also not in the eschew bread and never ever look at it again camp. 

Indeed, to really be on the Keto diet you have to eschew all carbohydrates which includes bread.  Oddly I've heard some people on the diet claim that you can drink alcohol, but I can't see hwo that could possibly be true.  Still, having looked into it extremely briefly apparently you can drink hard alochol and some wines.  It must be beer you can't, maybe.  I'm not gong to bother studying it.

Anyhow, the problem I have with this thesis is that first of all it forces your body into a state that it's not naturally in, which strkes me as a bad idea, and secondly, bread has been a human staple for so long we have no long how long that is.

We know now that human beings have been harvesting wild grains, pounding it into flour, and baking it millenia.  People took up making bread before they took up farming.  Entire cultures lived on mostly bread (not a very good idea either) for centuries.  If bread was going to badly blimp up everyone all of Europe would have looked like hot air balloons for all the Middle Ages.

Now, obviously that's absurd because people were engaged in heavy labor all the time and food was short so they burned off what htey were eating and didn't eat that much in hte first palce so. . .

hmmm. . . wait a minute. . . .

Exactly.

I only know one person really well who had adopted the keto diet to loose weight, and really needed to loose weight. Taht person lost a lot at first, and the it stopped.

No suprise there.

Your body was evolved for feast and famine in the first place, and that's what's going on there.  At some point the DNA, I suspect, overrides everything else and decides to ignore what's going on and the progress ends.  Too many calories in. . . not enough calories out.

And while I'm definately not in the "red meat is going to kill you" camp, it's difficult for me to beleive that what I see people on the keto diet eating is really a great idea. Three full meals of nothing but fatty meat?  Can that really be good for you? 

It might not be harmful if your job burns off a zillion calories a day, but otherwise, there's some reason to question that.  Indeed, simply by observation it's long been noted that American Southerners die younger than those elsewhere, and that the high fat diet has something to do with that.

So in the end, again, eating a more natural diet, including raising it yourself and harvesting it, including the ribeyes, is probably a better way to go.

Before I trail off from this, however, I will note that I do think that the Intermittant Fasting diet, assuming a person is healthy enough for it, probably is backed up by science as eveolutionary biology woudl completely support it.  In a state of nature, we rarely got full square meals a day. 

I'm not going to go into depath on intermittent fasting, but I'll note that I've seen and experienced that working simpply by acciddent.  For whatever reason, at some points in my own life I haven't gotten three square meals a day and when that was the case, I really lost weight.*  And others I've known who do that, most who are simply indifferent to foods, experience the same thing on occasion.

That's a rather obvious calorie in, calorie out, type of things, we'd note.

So there's something to that, and its not a weird offense to nature.  Combine that with a natural diet as noted, and you probably are doing as well as you can.

And what would that natural diet be?  Well Michael Pollan claims its to "eat real food, mostly vegetables".  I don't eat that way, but if I had my ruthers I'd eat all food I raised or caught.  That would create a problem with my long suffering spouse so we don't quite make that, but I would if I could.  So, using the killetarian phrase I've heard elsewhere and used here, I'd go with stuff I hunted for, fished for, and raised, except when I couldn't.  That  seems the scientifically sound diet to me.

Well, what about supplements?

M'eh.

Now, there are people who need very legitmately dietary supplements.  It seems to me that when I was a kid every kid on earth took vitamins of some kind and ours did when they were young.  I get that.  But for some reason a lot of adults feel they need supplements that are of a highly dubious nature.  And right now dubosity is in full flower with "essential oils" and "CBD Oil".

Let's start with "essential oils".

There aren't any.  None whatsoever.

Oh, that's not true, some oils really are essential.  In our current economy, petroleum oil is, for example, essential.  Mineral oil is needed for machinery.

If you aren't a car or a machine, however, there's no such thing as essential oils.

The entire oncept is amazingly dubious, but people buy off on it, even educated people, for some reason.  I think the reason is a deep seated yearning for the natural combined iwth a modern "I never get outdoors" lifestyle.  In their heart of hearts the exponents of "essential oils", who are almsot all women, imagine themselves living out a scense such as depicted in the numerous Soviet Realism paintings in which buxom Russian lasses work in agriculture in bare feet, those bare feet sopping up gallons of essential oils

Soviet realist paining of farm women soaking up essential wheat and barely oil through their feet. . . or something like that.

Well, that's bunk.

If you want your body to have the essential anything it's supposed to have, eat what you are supposed to eat and avoid what you aren't supposed to eat.  If it comes from a processing plant that involves something other than squashing it, you probably ought not to eat it.

That's about it.

Among the oils that are now subject to a craze is "CBD Oil".

CBD Oil is, of course, part of the overall Everything Marijuana Craze that the US is now fully engaged in, a fad being fueled in part because of its illegal (under Federal law) status and the accompanying fact that its real effects can't accordingly be studied.  In spite of hte fact that the scientific data on nearly everything hemp related is completely lacking, the public is now being sold on an endless series of wild claims for the product that aren't backed up by anything other htan marketing . . .just like tobacco once was.

*I don't really get three full squares now.  I'm not a big person and I don't eat lunch everyday.  Oddly enough, if I do, it's simply as a vehicle to get a mid day break from working or because I happen to be home and there's food.  I never eat a large noon meal as a rule, and on the rare occasions I do, it wipes me out for the rest of the day.  I don't eat much of a breakfast either and if I do, it's usually breakfast  cereal with no sugar, which is about the only time I consume milk as I don't really like milk much.

Jury finds you can cross corners in Carbon County.

Elk Mountain as viewed from Shirley Basin.

Big news on the public access to lands front:

Jury finds four corner-crossing hunters not guilty of trespass

Now, what this isn't.

It isn't a court declaration that's binding precedent on the whole state.  It's one jury, in a circuit court case. That's it.

It does mean that these four guys are not going to be convicted.

And beyond that, it shows that juries, quite frankly, are unlikely to convict anyone for corner crossing.  Not only in Carbon County, but anywhere in the state.

And it doesn't end the issue, actually.  A civil suit remains, and it's far more likely to have a bigger impact, as it will likely be the one that ultimately goes to the Supreme Court and the Wyoming Supreme Court will then determine the issue.

It does send a signal, however, both to courts (of course) but to the legislature on how average Wyomingites view these issues, and that likely is summed up by a comment made in court by the defendants' lawyer:

He believed the whole mountain was his and that no one but [he] was allowed to be there … like a king.”

DEFENSE ATTORNEY RYAN SEMERAD ON RANCH OWNER FRED ESHELMAN

Eschelman is an entrepreneur who is noted for his charitable donations. . . and his donations to right wing politicians as well.  He's apparently humble and generous. Not so generous, however, that the South Carolinian saw fit to just turn a blind eye to this matter or to generally allowing some of the less well funded access to public land, not his land, on his Wyoming ranch.

The original encounter, moreover, was caught on audio and video, with Eschelman's employee stating to law enforcement;“Do they realize how much money my boss has? …and property?”

And indeed, his having a Wyoming ranch brings to mind Thomas Wolfe's comment on that in his book A Man In Full.

On the topic of decisions, this also points out the dangers of pursuing something best left untouched, something that was pointed out a couple of years ago in the Wyoming ve. Herrera case.  Sometimes, there are issues that you'd rather leave undecided.

Indeed here, the County Attorney, an elected official, made the decision to prosecute, no doubt based on prior interpretations of the law, which would have favored the same.  But in doing so, she's accidentally taken the side of a wealthy out of stater against the interest of common Wyomingites.  This probably never crossed her mind, but it likely has crossed the mind of a lot of locals by this point, and the effective statements of the defense now doubt have taken root.  Eschelman, in the words of the defense, is a would be king and oppressor.  I've now seen public comments that the County Attorney prosecuted as she was influenced by his wealth.  That's extremely unlikely, she was probably influenced by the law, and may very well not be in the class to whom this issue is dear to the heart, but she's no doubt aware that it is to many now.  How this also plays out is yet to be seen.

And indeed, this takes us back to the topic of allmannsretten, which we've addressed elsewhere.

As noted, this story is still playing out.  It'll be very interesting to see where it goes ultimately.

The 2021 Season

 It wasn't a great one, for a variety of reasons.

The Dude after the last day of hunting.  We finished up with an attempt, unsuccessful, on Chukars.  He was tired.

As with most hunters, the season doesn't quite follow the calendar year.  For me, it starts sometime in spring when spring turkey season opens up.  When that closes down, its fishing season for me, even though my state doesn't really have a dedicated fishing season.  You can fish all year long.

Indeed, when my daughter was at home, fishing season started as soon as waterfowl ended in January, with that being ice fishing season.  She's away at university now, so there hasn't been any ice fishing recently.

Anyhow, there's turkey season, and then fishing season, followed by sage grouse and dove season, antelope season, deer season, and elk season.  This assuming I didn't draw any special tags, like moose, and that would be a safe assumption.

Big game season yields into waterfowl season.

Seasons dictated by nature, the weather, and I guess the game and fish department.  A better calendar, however, than one dictated by professional sports or by actuaries.

Indeed, if I had my druthers, which would mean having the extra time, I'd add gardening season and this would effectively be my life.  Just the other day a slightly younger colleague of mine spoke about his dreams for retirement (which with five kids, only one of whom is in college, I'll predict will remain a lifelong dream).  They involved "travel", and when I mean travel, I mean global travel.

I have utterly no such desires whatsoever.  I've crossed oceans by plane more than once and if I never do so again, that's okay by me.

I'm a simple man.

Anyhow, in terms of unrealized dreams, this has been a year of unrealized dreams for me in a lot of personal ways.  2021 won't go down as a happy year for a lot of people, spirit of the times and all, and it certainly won't for me.

I did start off the year with turkey season.

Me early in the turkey season, dog behind me.  Yes, the dog goes.  The rifle in this picture may have been near its last hunt, as it was stolen this past year.  The hat is a heavy duty Park Service dress campaign hat.  The year before last my old reproduction, heavy duty, beaver felt M1911 campaign hat, which had become my fishing hat, and then hunting hat, bit the dust and, worse yet, blew out of my Jeep on the same day that the Dude was bitten by a rattlesnake.  The jacket is a surplus Swiss Army smock.

For quite a few years, I had access to some farm ground with turkeys on it.  That ground sold in 2020 and my access went with that.  This meant, of course, that finding a turkey, in the general season, in my region, was made quite a bit more difficult, but that's the way such things go.

I stumbled on an area which in 2019 I was the only one who was hunting turkeys.  Even better, early in the turkey season, you have to really hike in.  Last time I really did this heavily, in 2019, I was about the only person I saw.

The season started off that way, and I did run into turkeys.

I’m probably the only guy who takes his hunting dog out for turkey hunting, although I'm not hunting turkeys with him.  He's hiking.  Things have gotten so that I can't go out the door on a weekend anymore without the dog.  He won't allow it to happen.  This is detrimental to turkey hunting, however.

I did find a turkey at one point, but I was armed with a .22 Mag rifle, and it was in a tree.  I frankly didn't have a good enough view of it, from a distance, to tell if it was a tom or not.  I passed on the shot, and eventually he flew off.

The next trip, my luck on isolation ran out.  When I was up on the mountain, I could hear the motorized ATV brigade down in the valley.  Trying to pursue a turkey down a heavily wooded slope, I could hear them coming up. They never saw me, but I sure could hear, and then see, them.  I'm sure every turkey in the county could as well.  On the way down they passed me, and then when I was loading the dog they went by me again.

Now, like a lot of folks who are gasoline jockeys, they weren't very attune to what they were doing and where they were going.  I've had this happen twice this past year (I'll get to the other in a moment), but I was worried for the dog.  Frankly, I was highly distracted.  I put the rifle on the hood of the Jeep to load him so he wouldn't get hit.  When they passed, with the dog in, I got in and started to drive off.  I realized, however, that the rifle wasn't in the truck, and I went back to get it.

It was gone.  I walked the entire area that day, more than once, and again the next day, and again one more day after that.

I was the only one there, other than them.  I'm certain they took it.

And by took it, I mean stole it.  It wasn't hard to figure out whose it was.

I've never liked ATVs much as I think they're an insult to nature, frankly, and people abuse them.  I see people roaring over the sagebrush with them, and with their asses so welded to them that they just can't seem to get out on foot.  It's not all that uncommon for me to find somebody who will state that they didn't see anything. . . 

Yeah. . well if you are as noisy as the Afrika Korps, you aren't going to.

I did go back later, but, no turkeys.  I did run into them, but I could never get up on them.  I'm more than a bit unusual for a turkey hunter in that I stalk them, and I lack a call.  Very few people hunt them that way.  But when I first hunted them as a teenager, that's what we did, and I'm not patient enough to wait in one spot for a long time.

Then came fishing season.

Now, about that, I’m mostly a stream fisherman and always have been.  I will fish other bodies of water, and I certainly do, but that's my focus.

I can't really complain about fishing this year, other than that due to my work schedule I didn't get out nearly as much as I had hoped. And that's something to complain about.  Otherwise, my main complaint would be, I guess, that my son was off at school for most of the summer and my daughter had to have back surgery.  My daughter is a long time fisherman and my son has taken it up with more earnest recently.  

It's an odd deal to look back and realize that in some ways you're repeating your own father's history.  He taught me to fish, but at some point I became a fanatic outdoorsman and there were plenty of times that I went out on my own.  When I went to school, of course, he was left in that position, and he was a great and frequent fisherman.  So he was fishing quite often on his own.

Now I am.

One of the creeks I fished this year, and should have done a lot better in than I did.

Anyhow, before late summer yielded to other concerns, I did get out some, fishing the creeks in the mountains.  I reconfirmed a finding I'd make the prior year that a spot I found that looks good is, in fact, not.  It also looks like it ought to be populated by bears, and it probably is.

Getting into the spirit of things.

The first bird hunting season around here is blue grouse.

This has been frustrating due to interactions with novice game wardens the past few years who can't quite bring themselves to accept that a person of six decades residence knows more about how to get onto this spot and never touch foot on private ground than they do, having just arrived from California as they have, and seeing the world from a 3/4 ton pickup as they are.  When proven wrong, they varied from apologetic in the first instance, to blisteringly aggressive and rude in the second.^[1]  This year, however, the local chief warden took the matter in his hands and wrote me a note, for which I am greatly appreciative.  So I got up in to the high sticks without incident.

Didn't see a single bird, however.

That, I suspect, is because it had been so dry.  No water, no birds.

I also ended up doing this by myself.  This used to be an annual routine for me and my son, and one year for me my son and my daughter.  Indeed, since my son was hold enough to hunt birds, I've never had a bird season where I didn't have him accompany me at least once, but this year, due to university, that was the case.  And not only for blue grouse, but for everything, save for fishing and antelope hunting.

Blue grouse here is followed by the short sage chicken season.  I'd seen a lot of sage chickens in the summer, but ran into one during sage chicken season. Actually, the dog found it, not me, and I wasn't ready for it. 

No sage chickens.

After that, both kids came home, but on different weekends, for antelope.

I managed, for the third year in a row, not to draw an antelope tag, and I'm not happy about it.  I like antelope as food.  I don't like the fact that my state weights out of state tags more heavily than any neighboring state.  I am, after all, a killetarian and I figure that if you live in New Jersey there are deer in New Jersey.  Hunt them.

Lots of economic interests don't figure it that way, however.

Both kids got really nice antelope, I'll note.

Deer came after that.  I only got out once, although now I can't recall why.  I didn't see any deer, but I did get stuck pretty bad in the high country.

Well, that's not quite true.  I did get out a second time, but it was marked by the fact that I fractured a tooth, and hadn't realized it, about a day prior.  It impacted severely that morning and by the time I was where I was going, I was unbelievably sick.  I barely made the long drive home, and during that time frame a storm had come in, and the highway became a sheet of ice.  A tooth extraction followed.

And then came waterfowl.

It was a fantastic waterfowl year, the best in years and years.  I did do really well hunting ducks and geese, and got to spend some blind time with one of my oldest friends.  The only sad note is that due to various things by mid summer things were a bit sad on other score and that lingered as I recalled that my trips out to hunt ducks and geese, with more around than there have been for eons, were again alone.

It was in the late waterfowl season that I had my second vehicular run in of the year, and it was similar to the first.  I was duck and goose hunting on a stretch of the river.  Up until the last few years, this stretch, which is 7,000 feet high, closes to fishermen because of the weather.  Nobody wants to fly fish in 80 mph winds when it's 10F.

That's started to change, however.

For one thing, in spite of the high altitude, it hasn't been as cold up that high recently.  It's still really windy, however.  On the day I was out there, it was probably around 35F with 80 mph winds.

I'm a fisherman too, but when hunting starts, for me fishing stops.  I'm more of a hunter than a fish hunter.  My father was the other way around.  Anyhow, I sort of figure that guys who have the run of the river from April until late August, can ease up a bit in September through December, and most in fact do.  If you see a fisherman on any other stretch of the river from August on, they tend to be friendly as a rule and share the river.  I try to avoid them.

On this stretch its different, however, and that's because most of the fishermen who tend to be in this stretch are from the big rectangular state to our south.

Now, I'm not the only waterfowler on this stretch of the river.  A few other dedicated guys are dedicated blind hunters on the same stretch.  It must be the case that they stake their claim and the fishermen avoid them.  I generally avoid the fishermen.

On this day, however, I drove down to a stretch of the river in this area that I knew was empty.  I got things, and the dog, out a couple of hundred yards away from the river and then, as the dog was milling about, a Rectangular State SUV came blasting down the two track and nearly hit my dog. Worse yet, they saw him.  

What that was about was them getting to the river before me. They probably thought I was a fisherman too, or they knew I was a hunter and they wanted their stretch of river. I hunted it anyway.  They knew they'd been assholes as they kept looking back as I walked the long stretch down and the long stretch back.  On top of it, they put in on what amounts to a wind tunnel (I knew that) and had no luck.  

There was no need for that.

Last year I took up chukar hunting in earnest.

Me chukar hunting.  Why am I dressed like I'm in the Swiss Army?  Well the reason is that I'm too cheap to buy the quuality hunting clothes that other people do, and I grew use to miltiary style clothing as a National Guardsmen and I like its features, particularly the zillions of pockets.  On  this day, the wind was bad, and hence the hood up.  Also, I'm wearing GI field pants over Levis for the same reason.

The reason has to do with having run into chukars in a major way in 2020.  I knew all the spots they'd been in, and therefore I went back. I got. . . one.

Indeed, I saw them only once.

Another reason that I've taken chukars up is that in the last few years I haven't drawn an elk tag and chukars take me into rough country and I tend not to be very good at it.

I'm not one of those people who run around looking for challenges in life.  Indeed, quite frankly, my life had plenty of challenges early on, and I don't need anymore.  Frankly, for that matter, I tend to find people who claim to take up occupations because they're "challenging" to be full of  bull.

Having said that, I'm completely different with outdoor endeavors.  Maybe I do like a challenge, and perhaps that why I'm after chukars.

While not exactly on my seasons, my failures at chukars caused me to try to find out more about them and that lead me to this excellent blog:

The Reigning Chukar Champions

It's a great read.

Anyhow, different year, different hatch.

Last day of the season.  Yep, more unecessary camouflage for the same reason.  The jacket is an Australian wind proff SAS smock that an Australian friend gave me, the trousers are U.S. Army pants.  I'm wearing a Charhartt coat for wamrth.

Footnotes:

1. In the first instance the game warden followed me out, at my invitation, and in the end relented with "I didn't think that this could be done".  On the way, I somewhat worried about him rolling his pickup truck and warned him about a hill, turn and traverse across a dam that's no big deal for a Jeep, but is a big deal for a pickup, but he did it.  He probably didn't believe me that this was a way in and out.

Well, in the end, he did.

In the second instance, the warden started off as rude and argumentative. When I explained the road that I came on, he said "it isn't a road", claiming that 4x4s had just created it the past few years.

That claim was absolute bullshit.  I looked him up, and he was a relatively recent arrival from California.

I should note that several years prior a different game warden was hugely enthusiastic that anyone had gone to such an effort to get where I was went, which was just a jumping off point at that for a hike in the mountains in pursuit of grouse.

Anyhow, with the experience noted of the two difficult wardens, I actually called ahead for the second year in a row.  The first time I didn't get a call back, and then I got the rude warden.  I did it again this year and got the regional warden, who was apologetic about his green underlings, and wrote me a note so that they'd leave me alone.  I kept hoping to run into them, but didn't.  Indeed, coming out of the hills the only one I ran into was on the main dirt road, and he'd just stopped a party of University of Wyoming female ag students who were on some sort of expedition.  I stopped, but he just waved me on, which is what I would have done if I were him.

Friday Farming Blog Mirror: Seeign With Different Eyes

 

SEEING WITH DIFFERENT EYES

I'll be frank that I don't put much credence in diets. . .

and think that a lot of them are basically bunkus.*  And history has demonstrated that a lot of the current thought in any one era on diet in general is probably wrong.

Ice Cream cake, 1937.  I frankly didn't know ice cream cakes existed in 1937, but they obviously did.  Most Americans weren't overweight at this time, for reasons that will be noted below.

There's constantly some new diet fad going around as well as some new theory about what people should eat.  Almost every study on diets demonstrates that people will lose weight on the at first and then regain it.  Up until something I will link in below explored that, the latter was not obvious to me, but what seems to be fairly obvious is that most diet theories are pure bull.

And yet Americans are absolutely fascinated about diets.  No matter where you live or work, you are going to hear constantly from people about some new diet they are on.  Not only are they on it, but now it's popular to combine the diets with the latest pseudo-science about taking this and that, which sound more like solutions to difficult plumbing or automotive problems than they do to losing weight and eating healthy.

A lot of dieting advice and dietary advice is amazingly similar to the same sort of stuff that people used to spout about automobiles all the time.  Car worn out and tired?  No problem, just pour a quart of Amazing Berserkoil into your engine!  It'll detoxify, clarify and contains essential oils that your car will love and admire!

I'm not a nutritionist and have no training in this area at all, but what has always seemed completely obvious to me is that dietary topics ought to be governed by evolutionary biology.  I.e, you are evolved to eat in a certain way, and if you don't eat that way, you're going to have some negative consequence develop.  You are also evolved to engage in certain activities, and if you do them and eat the way that you were evolved to, you'll probably be just fine, health wise, in so far as your health is governed by food intake, and quite a bit of it is.

But that doesn't fit the most recent buy this, eat that, craze.

So it'd be rare indeed for me to link in anything regarding diet. But having recently heard this, this makes scientific sense to me (which very few diets, including the currently popular "Keto" diet do):

Akin, who is known principally as a Catholic Apologist, but who also has a keen interest in a very large range of topics and a command of a blistering number of them, discusses diets and weight loss in general, but as this video makes plain, he's an advocate of what has come to be known as "Intermittent Fasting" and an opponent of processed foods. There's more to it than that, but that's basically what I want to point out by linking this in. To at least that extent (and I'd disagree with him on a few things mentioned in here), I think he's right.

The reason for this has to do with science.

Basically, it seems to me, you are most likely evolved to eat fairly lean meat and simple vegetables and grains because that's what your ancestors did for thousands upon thousands of years.  Do that, and dietary wise, I suspect you'll be just fine.

Illustration of Lapps hunting from 1565, the same way they hunted in 565, and in 1565BC, and so on.  Everyone, in one form or another, lived this way, and you are still supposed to.

I'll credit that in some instances this is a bit altered beyond the very simple (but perhaps hard to apply) extent that it may seem when putting it forth in that fashion.  Evolution does occur, and there are people who are very, very long associated with agriculture. . . although not to the extent you may think and indeed all people are more associated with agriculture than some believe.  People were making bread out of simple grains before they cultivated wheat, it turns out, for example.  And Mediterranean people who cultivated wheat very early on also were big on fish hunting (or, yes fishing).  Pastoral people who took up raising livestock continued hunting and even in Palestine during Christ's time it's known that the Jewish people and their neighbors not only raised livestock, they hunted and fish hunted (yep, fishing).

Now, what additionally also seems to me to be pretty self-evident is that it's usually been the case that the "three squares a day" combined with sitting on your butt all day is not the historic norm.  Nor is "processed food" at all.  You aren't actually evolved to eat a lot of processed food and three big meals a day.  Nor are you evolved to even eat two big meals a day.

Take all of this into account, diet wise, and you are likely good to go, diet wise.

Now, depending upon your individual metabolism you may be able to get away with it, even if you have a sedentary job.  But most people won't be.  And perhaps that's where I depart from Akin.  Akin's commentary in the video states that exercise doesn't matter much in terms of weight loss or gain (he doesn't say that exercise isn't otherwise important), but I frankly very much disagree.  Indeed, I think the lack of exercise that modern American life entails, combined with the advance of processed food, and combined with the constant presence of food, and further combined with the giant proportions that served food now features, combines to make people rather large.  I.e., lack of exercise is an element of that, but a pretty important one.

Indeed, I come by all of these opinions not only because I tend to look at a lot of such things through an evolutionary biology lens, but because I also have some personal experience with all of this, making me a bit of a control set.  So I'm pretty convinced as to all of this.

I've never been obese, but when I was a kid and an early teen I was on the chubby end of things.  I was always pretty active, but I also lived in an environment in which there were three meals a day (as a kid should get) and deserts and soda were also pretty much always available.  My mother never drank soda, but she did drink a lot of sweet tea.  She was an awful cook, but both of my parents liked ice cream quite a bit so we always had ice cream on hand.  My mother had a nearly hyperactive constitution but my father was inclined to carry a slight bit of extra weight as here both of his parents, and myself by extension and genetic inheritance.

One summer when I was 16/17 years old, however, I obtained a job in which I drove for a city garage chasing parts every day.  This was in the pre air-conditioned era, and what that meant was that I reported to work really early and worked a full day.  As a result, I wasn't eating much before I left the door and by and large I simply quit eating at noon.  I was Intermittent Fasting before it had a name and without any particular intent.  I was also pretty active in this role as a parts chaser.

By the end of the summer I'd lost a lot of weight.  Indeed, going into the summer I was at or near my current weight, which is 165 lbs more or less (I slide up and down a bit).  By modern standards that puts me right at the upper level of an "ideal weight" for my height or slightly overweight.  As I've explored before, by the standards of a century ago, that's overweight.  At any rate, however, going into that summer the extra pounds I was carrying included some flab, which isn't good.  By the end of the summer, however, I'd lost ten to fifteen pounds through no effort of my own.  By that time, as I'd lost the desire to eat lunch anymore, I kept loosing until I was around 140 lbs, maybe (probably) less.  When I went into basic training the next year, I likely reported around 135lbs.

In basic training I gained weight up until I came down with pneumonia, at which time I really lost weight as I couldn't eat but was still active.  When I came home from Ft. Sill I weighed 123 lbs, which is really light.  Having said that, photographs of me early in basic training suggest I was getting pretty light at first anyhow.  But, that 123 lbs actually reflected a late Advanced Training weight gain after I got out of the hospital.

Significantly, however, after that first summer the weight I put on or retained was muscle and not fat.  In college, I came up to 145 lbs, the weight I was at when I got married, but again I was really active and my gain in that time came on in muscle.  Since then, through having a sedentary job and what not, I've gained the extra fifteen pounds, or perhaps less on a day-to-day basis, but I'm much more heavily muscled than I was when I was 16.

Now, from time to time for one reason or another, I've gotten to where I'll skip breakfast or lunch, or both.  Doing this on odd occasion is pretty routine for me, but I'll sometimes do it for days in a row.  I just don't always feel like eating breakfast for no particular reason, and I've never regained the desire to eat much lunch.  After I left for college I lost my taste for sweets and I never buy candy for the house, although my wife is the opposite, and she does.  When I left college, I also quit buying soda.

Indeed, in my college years, as I already noted, I lived on a very primitive diet. All wild game and mostly vegetables, for much of the year, that had come from my parents garden.  On that diet, you won't put on weight.  And as noted after I married beef came back into our diet (which I do like), but some desserts, which I very rarely bought or made for myself when single (cherry and apple pies, from our own cherries and apples excepted, and when in season), reappeared.  So its no wonder that I added fifteen pounds, and within a few years.  But I'll drop down to 155 fairly readily when I don't eat lunch for days in a row.

All of which gets to this point.

This time of year is a dietary nightmare.  It's a nightmare in part because the people who are the Keto Schmeato All Bean Burrito Diet are going to be bothering you about that, or whatever the latest dietary fad is, and it's a nightmare as there's a constant flood of food that you don't need to eat going by you constantly.

Indeed, this thread was started some time ago, and I'm just finishing it off now because of this.  I'm hearing about the diets. And this will mean, in part, I'll hear about people who claim to be "fasting" but still eat enough at noon to put me out for the rest of the day, but it's also the case that in my office its freakishly the case that seemingly 3/4s of the office has late in the year birthdays. That means that in November and December there's enough cake going through the office to feed all of Europe for a year, at least calorie wise.

And to add to that, people just start bringing in food at random.  Indeed, there's one person who seemingly does this constantly from their home, and it's all sugary food.  This is surplus from that person's own larders which means that the same is buying, but not eating, lots of cake, candy and the like.  All of which makes it pretty hard to resist, as it's simply there.

And then for some reason cake like cookies, from a newer cookie company, are showing up in the house here.  We're tiny people, and we can't really eat cookies the size of large pizzas, and particularly not sugary ones.  My wife and my daughter love these cookies, but my daughter is so active that she'll burn through the calories no matter what.  Like most modern Americans, however, my job principally entails, active lifestyle wise, sitting on my butt.

Of course, some would say "go to the gym", but I hate that sort of public display.  And frankly, I don't have the time or don't imagine that I do.  And that's the sort of urban Cow's Revenge activity that I really don't like.

All of which caused me, when I got on the scale last night, to be shocked that I've ballooned up to 170 lbs. 

Well, it's not like I don't know what to do.  And it doesn't involve Keto or the Orange Blossom Special Cleanse or something like that.

But it would be a lot easier on a "natural diet", but which I mean one that I shot, caught and grew myself.

Blog Mirror: Could you do Thanksgiving like it's 1621? An Agrarian Thanksgiving

Could you do Thanksgiving like it's 1621? An Agrarian Thanksgiving

 - November 25, 2021

I wrote out a blog entry for Lex Anteinternet on what the first Thanksgiving Dinner in 1621 must have been like.

Pheasants.

It really surprised me, even though it shouldn't.  We modern Americans are so used to the "poverty of resources of our ancestors" story that, well, we believe it.  In reality, that first gathering in English North America to celebrate God's bounty and give thanks for it, no matter how imperfect the Church of England and Puritan celebrants, and the native ones as well, was a really bountiful feast.  I've joked in the past that it probably consisted of salt cod, but in fact it seems likely to have featured waterfowl, maybe turkey, deer, mussels and quite an abundance of other foods stuffs.

Unlike now, what it didn't feature was pie, probably, even though pies of all sorts were a feature of the English diet, although at this point I frankly wonder. What would have kept there from being pie would have been a lack of wheat, as that crop wouldn't have come around for at least a few years. And the lack of a grain crop meant that there wouldn't have been beer, if that's something your Thanksgiving usually features (mine does).  It's an open question if there would have been wine.  There would have been a lot of fresh vegetables, however, as well as fresh foul, venison and fresh fish.

It would have been a good meal, in some ways one we'd recognize, but also one in which we might note some things were missing.  No potatoes, for example.

This set me to wondering what a killetarian/agrarian like me might end up with if allowed to do a  Thanksgiving Dinner all of stuff I'd shot or gathered.  Could I do it?

Well, there'd be no mussels on my table, but most years there would be fare similar to what the first celebrants had.  There are wild turkeys in my region, although I failed to get one this year.  Events conspired against me and I didn't get a deer (at least yet) either.  But if I had a major dinner, and time, I think I could muster it.  It might be pheasant rather than turkey, or a wild turkey, which is really no different in taste, only in bulk, from the domestic ones.

The challenge, however, would be vegetables, depending upon how feral I'd take this endeavor.  If I went full hunter/gatherer, here I'd really be in trouble.  I frankly know next to nothing about edible wild plants.

Now, starting off, I'd note that in my region, like the rest of the globe, a vegetarian would have starved to death in a few days prior to production agriculture.  It's not only an unnatural diet, but it's impossible up until that time.  Indeed, one of the ironies of agriculture has been the introduction of unnatural diets.  When you read, for example, of the Irish poor living on potatoes and oatmeal, while that's not what their Celtic ancestors had eaten prior to 1) row crop agriculture, and 2) the English.  Shoot, potatoes aren't even native to Ireland.

Anyhow, I note that as the native peoples of the plains were more heavily meat eaters than anything else, as that's what there was to eat.  But there is some edible vegetation.

I just don't know much about it.

I guess I'd start off with that I knwo that there's a collection of native berries you can eat.  I mostly know about this as my mohter used to collect some and make wine with them, and I've had syrup and jelly made with them as well. UW publishes a short pamphlet on them, which is available here.  There are also wild leeks, which my mother and father, and at least one of my boyhood friends would recognize, which my mother inaccurately called "wild onions".

And that's about all I know about that.

Which isn't enough to make much of a meal.

Now, a person could probably research this and learn more, and I should, simply because I'd like to know.  Indeed, on the Wind River Indian Reservation there's a "food sovereignty" movement which seeks to reintroduce native foods to the residents there in order to combat health problems, which is a really interesting idea and I hope it has some success.  I hope that they also publish some things on this topic, assuming that they haven't already.

So, in short, at least based on what the present state of my knowledge is, the Thanksgiving fare would be pretty limited, vegetable wise.

Now, what about grow your own?

Well, if expanded out to include what I can grow myself, well now we're on to something else indeed. . . assuming that I can get my pump fixed, which I haven't, solely due to me.

If I were to do that, then I'm almost fully there for a traditional Thanksgiving Dinner, omitting only the bread and cranberry sauce.

And I'm not omitting the cranberry sauce.

I'm not omitting the bread, either.

Frankly, I think the modern "bread is bad for you" story is a pile of crap.  People have incorporated grains into their diet for thousands of years.  To the extent that its bad for you, it's likely because Americans don't eat bread, they eat cake.  That's what American bread is.

Of course, I think the keto diet is a pile of crap too, which I discuss on another Lex Anteinternet post.  So here, I'd have to make bread, or buy it, and I'd prefer to make it. Soda bread more particularly.

On this, I'd be inclined, if I could to have an alcoholic beverage for the table, which is another thing, albeit a dangerous one, that humans have been doing since . . . well too long to tell.  The Mayflower sojourners started off their voyage with a stock of beer. . . ironically in a ship that had once been used to haul wine, but they were out when they put in at Plymouth Rock.  By the fall of 1621 it's unlikely that they'd brewed any. as they lacked grain.  The could have vinted wine, however.  If they did, we don't know about it.

So in my hypothetical, if I stuck to local stocks, I could probably do the same.  I don't know how to do it, but I could learn.  But I'm not going to do so, as frankly my recollections of that wine aren't sufficiently warm to cause me to bother with it, and I recall it took tons of sugar, which obviously isn't something I'm going to produce myself.

I'm not going to brew beer either, although plenty of people do.  I don't have the time, or the inclination, and either I'd end up with way too much or not enough.

And this reflects the nature of agrarianism, really.  A life focused on nature with agriculture as part of that.  I don't have to make everything myself, but I have to be focused on the land, have a land ethic, and focus on what's real.

Maybe next year I'll try this.