|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Hunting and eating wild food in T2k (or any post-apocalyptic setting)
So, I was watching snippets of "Cooking in the Danger Zone" that was shown on the BBC, specifically the episode where the host went to the infamous Zone of Exclusion in the Ukraine, the site of the Chernobyl disaster. They were talking about the various levels of radiation that still existed in areas, with some of the higher level areas still in places like the Red Forest. They also commented about how nature, in particular wildlife and native vegetation had reclaimed much of the area.
My question would be, let's assume in a T2k or similar setting that you're traveling/wandering near areas that were hit at some point in the war by tactical nukes. It's been several years since the nukes fell, and wildlife has returned to the area. However, you now have residual radiation in areas, and the animals are likely being exposed to it as they're eating vegetation that has been growing in the area and have absorbed the radiated particles. We'll assume you've got geiger counters, or at least have a general idea of areas to avoid that were exposed to lethal doses of fallout. However, animals tend to wander unlike vegetation, so how do you protect yourself knowing that deer, wild boar, etc. that you shot or trapped may potentially be contaminated? Also, refugees will likely be more desperate and will eat whatever food they can scrounge, including food grown in areas that may still have hazardous levels of radiation in the soil. Also, it's not just radiation to worry about. Lingering residue from chemical or bio weapons may have contaminated certain water supplies or soil as well, again affecting produce and anything eating it. Granted most of it will disperse and break down over time when exposed to weather (theoretically anyway), but there may still be nasty side-effects. So...any thoughts?
__________________
"The use of force is always an answer to problems. Whether or not it's a satisfactory answer depends on a number of things, not least the personality of the person making the determination. Force isn't an attractive answer, though. I would not be true to myself or to the people I served with in 1970 if I did not make that realization clear." — David Drake |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I actually would not think there would be much left for wildlife. As you already pointed out, they tend to wander, and most would die. Also, as you have pointed out, refugees and hunters would kill everything in sight. I would not reccomend eating meat from animals that were even grazing on radiated plants. Radiation does not kill plants unless they are in seed form. However, plants do pass the radiation into their leaves and fruit. Two exceptions to this are corn and sunflowers. Corn has some funky side parts to how it works, but sunflowers actually eat up radiation. Once the radiation is cleaned up by weather, time, or moved, then plants growing in clean soil are safe to eat. In the past, I was a CBRNE recon platoon leader, but I was not school trained. If you are looking at modern day survival, I'd do more research. Don't take what I say as complete 100% accurate, its just my basic knowldege |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks. I imagine by 2000, as you said any effect from bio and chemical weapons will have mostly dispersed under breakdown from the sun, wind, weather, rain and other effects over time. That's pretty much the same story our NBC instructors told us when we practiced MOPP in the Air Force.
UNLESS, and I stress unless, perhaps your PC's happen to run into remnants of a military unit that still has some bio or chemical weapons that didn't get fired off, and god forbid, the weapons may not have been properly maintained and a few of them may be leaking? Or, the PC's find or stumble upon an abandoned munitions depot that still has several chemical weapons stacked somewhere, that may again be leaking or damaged. Unless I'm wrong, some bio and chemical weapons require a bit more careful maintenance than your typical munitions, but again I could be wrong. Now, radiation on the other hand....yeah, that's a bit of a different story. I'd expect the amount of nasty radiation still around in areas would be dependent on so many different factors. But radiation's nasty regardless, and it doesn't just go away when you're exposed to it after a while, it accumulates. My guess is if what you say is true, corn and sunflowers would be some /ideal crops to plant in areas that might still have traces of radiation. Ideally, of course. The reality would be whatever plant seeds are at hand and if the climate and soil is suitable enough. And of course, again, when you have starving soldiers and refugees basically looking for ANY food to eat, they're likely not going to be picky and grab what they can find, and worry about potential sickness from radiation buildup later. My question though, as silly as it may sound, if animals do eat vegetation that's taken up the rad particles into their systems, wouldn't that still be detectable? If so I could see a hunter perhaps wanting to use a geiger counter to check an animal after he's trapped or shot it, assuming he had one.
__________________
"The use of force is always an answer to problems. Whether or not it's a satisfactory answer depends on a number of things, not least the personality of the person making the determination. Force isn't an attractive answer, though. I would not be true to myself or to the people I served with in 1970 if I did not make that realization clear." — David Drake |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I suspect that the short version of the story is that most people don't have the means to identify contaminated meat and don't have the luxury of avoiding it in the T2K world. Even worse, in some cases places that were avoided in '98 and '99 due to radiation may be the best bets for hunting and foraging by 2000, as other areas have been hunted and harvested out.
On the plus side, the resulting uptick in cancers and such is probably not too noticeable, due to overall life expectancy plummeting down from 20th century levels and most people dying from disease (epidemic or just relating to the individual effects of chronic malnutrition), injuries or conditions made lethal by the collapse of the medical system, or violence well before cancer from fallout and background radiation gets them. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"The use of force is always an answer to problems. Whether or not it's a satisfactory answer depends on a number of things, not least the personality of the person making the determination. Force isn't an attractive answer, though. I would not be true to myself or to the people I served with in 1970 if I did not make that realization clear." — David Drake |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
You know, that said I'd wonder how safe some of the wildlife in parts of real-world Russia are for eating, considering the number of contaminated sites and improperly disposed radioactive waste lingering about...
__________________
"The use of force is always an answer to problems. Whether or not it's a satisfactory answer depends on a number of things, not least the personality of the person making the determination. Force isn't an attractive answer, though. I would not be true to myself or to the people I served with in 1970 if I did not make that realization clear." — David Drake |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|