4 ms·

Do you really need a whole farm just to provide nutrition for you family, even if it does have some livestock, or is there more to it than that? I remember read

Do you really need a whole farm just to provide nutrition for you family, even if it does have some livestock, or is there more to it than that? I remember reading about some amazing results that can be achieved on very small patches of land, with the right techniques, tools and planning. The official website is light on details, this article is better [2]. [1] https://www.themarketgardener.com/ https://www.themarketgardener.com/ [2] https://www.resilience.org/stories/2014-04-01/a-model-for-profitable-micro-farming/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2014-04-01/a-model-for-pr...

dkersten 6y ago
I remember reading something about a square foot or three of tightly packed grow space (using vegetables that complement each other or whatever; I also remember reading about was it tiered gardening?) is enough to feed a person. My mother grows a bunch of vegetables in about ~3 square feet of space and while its not everything she eats (vegetable or otherwise), it does cover a good bit and she always has more of what she grows than she needs. So if that's true, seems like a decent plot of land should be plenty for feeding a family yet still having some left over, at least for vegetables and maybe eggs. If you want to keep other livestock (lettergram mentions grass-fed beef), then I guess you do indeed need an actual farm.
- slfnflctd 6y ago
  > a square foot or three of tightly packed grow space [...] is enough to feed a person That seems insanely optimistic to me. I've done a lot of reading about people's attempts to feed themselves with home-grown agriculture, and it's way more difficult than many assume. I would multiply that square footage requirement about 1000x before even trying it-- and that's if all possible relevant research is implemented and everything goes smoothly. I tried & failed to find an article I read a few years ago which broke down a whole bunch of the math behind this, but here is a video that matches pretty closely with what I've read elsewhere (despite being short on sources): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926Z6wzf278 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926Z6wzf278
  - fock 6y ago
    yes, I think I've come to the conclusion that around 1000m² per person should be enough to have a significant impact on food supply per person in a non-optimal, manual-labor based workflow. 1/3m² won't cut it as the mother of the preposter probably also ate a healthy dose of carbohydrates, proteins and fat which generally are not abundant in any typical "decorative" vegetables. And if you want to selfsustain your family you really need a lot (just look at the weight of military ready-made meals and think that you have to produce that (as a baseline) (x 365 x number of people supplied). Also in any urban setting, the supply of clean water will kill you faster than any lack of food.

dkersten 6y ago

I remember reading something about a square foot or three of tightly packed grow space (using vegetables that complement each other or whatever; I also remember reading about was it tiered gardening?) is enough to feed a person. My mother grows a bunch of vegetables in about ~3 square feet of space and while its not everything she eats (vegetable or otherwise), it does cover a good bit and she always has more of what she grows than she needs. So if that's true, seems like a decent plot of land should be plenty for feeding a family yet still having some left over, at least for vegetables and maybe eggs. If you want to keep other livestock (lettergram mentions grass-fed beef), then I guess you do indeed need an actual farm.

slfnflctd 6y ago
> a square foot or three of tightly packed grow space [...] is enough to feed a person That seems insanely optimistic to me. I've done a lot of reading about people's attempts to feed themselves with home-grown agriculture, and it's way more difficult than many assume. I would multiply that square footage requirement about 1000x before even trying it-- and that's if all possible relevant research is implemented and everything goes smoothly. I tried & failed to find an article I read a few years ago which broke down a whole bunch of the math behind this, but here is a video that matches pretty closely with what I've read elsewhere (despite being short on sources): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926Z6wzf278 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926Z6wzf278
- fock 6y ago
  yes, I think I've come to the conclusion that around 1000m² per person should be enough to have a significant impact on food supply per person in a non-optimal, manual-labor based workflow. 1/3m² won't cut it as the mother of the preposter probably also ate a healthy dose of carbohydrates, proteins and fat which generally are not abundant in any typical "decorative" vegetables. And if you want to selfsustain your family you really need a lot (just look at the weight of military ready-made meals and think that you have to produce that (as a baseline) (x 365 x number of people supplied). Also in any urban setting, the supply of clean water will kill you faster than any lack of food.