Remote food storage?

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
P

Person

New Friend
Neighbor
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
3
Location
UT
Let's say you could buy bulk (low cost) food storage in grains and legumes, and the company would store it in their remote location. Would you, or people you know, buy something like this?

1. Perfect for local disasters/urban breakdown. Dont risk keeping food on site where it's a target and at risk of perishing.

2. Good for city dwellers that want a redundant food storage, and can be shipper to another location as needed (or pickup).

3. Huge money saver: I rotate food for you. Always fresh. No need to constantly eat though MRE's, dehydrated/freeze dried food.

Shipping is also paid for up front, and in case of national meltdown, rarely overnight event too, however unlikely, you could pick up. Or, I could pay for horse-wagon/wood-burning cars to deliver within x radius--sriously.`

Now, impossible to foresee every situation, but reasonably speaking, is this a product you or your city friends would buy?
 
I will pass. What would be the point is letting another person be in charge of your food or have it were you would have to rely on another person / group /agency / government to get the food to you?
 
OldCoot said:
No. I wouldn't trust that company to stay in business or actually have my goods in stock. I sure wouldn't trust my life on some company and sure wouldn't trust the ability to ship after a crisis.
Click to expand...

The essence of the ultimate prepper is: trust no one, and, flee civilization when necessary.
I am the same way. So, I figure this might not be the ideal place to ask. But consider your friends, family, and everyone that likes to keep up on the Kardashians, that just don't want to think about, nor manage, nor regularly consume, food storage a whole bunch

Case 1. You own your home and store food in your home:
There are still property taxes, upkeep, etc.. Maybe they wouldnt matter though
If you store in a storage unit, that is worse, because you have to pay the storage unit, IF, they still exist.

Case 2: You rent, or do not own home. Unlikely to have job at this point, and now you have to relocate, taking your food with you. Difficult/impossible/risky.

Cost to keep remote food storage in business:

Virtually nothing. The business (farm) would own the land, storage and such, so there is no ongoing operational cost to storing grain in silos. A certain amount of cash reserves would be kept to pay for property taxes, upkeep, security, etc...

Security:

Also could use auditors/cameras to ensure food supply and cash reserves.

Remote vs local food storage:

Look at the massive size of gold ETF's, and how many customers they have. Sure maybe you store precious stuff in your home, but not the only option. Argentina is a good example of the home invasion crisis because people keep money at home instead of banks. (npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/12/09/369616448/argentina-where-cash-is-king-and-robberies-are-on-the-rise) Food is under the same risk. Hard to imagine living in a city, where no one has food around you, and you do.

So, this can act as a Plan B for people that already have Plan A. Redundancy is not only valuable in hard drives.

Unable to ship after crisis:

99% of crisis' are regional. Chances of entire USA and its shipping networks going down in a week is pretty low. In the history of war, shipping usually worked. So, barring a complete invasion and takeover of the USA, or mega-asteroid, shipping should be operational. Besides, the business could guarantee a certain number of horse and wagons, with regional drop-off points across country.


Oh, and if you think you are safe in an urban/semi-urban area with food, this is what happened in the Ukraine in 1930's:

"Any man, woman, or child caught taking even a handful of grain from a collective farm could be, and often was, executed or deported. Those who did not appear to be starving were often suspected of hoarding grain. " - loc.gov/exhibits/archives/ukra.html

So maybe coming by to pick it up, or getting it shipped elsewhere is something to consider.
 
This sounds like the start of a business plan. It won't fly because your do not understand your audience. Preppers do not want their food stored where thy do not have control and full access. If the prepper can't get to it, how are you going to get it to them? If the SHTF event was national, how are they going to get their food from your group, that just decided to keep it for themselves? Too many holes in this plan. I will still pass.
 
Last edited:
Person said:
Let's say you could buy bulk (low cost) food storage in grains and legumes, and the company would store it in their remote location. Would you, or people you know, buy something like this?

1. Perfect for local disasters/urban breakdown. Dont risk keeping food on site where it's a target and at risk of perishing.

2. Good for city dwellers that want a redundant food storage, and can be shipper to another location as needed (or pickup).

3. Huge money saver: I rotate food for you. Always fresh. No need to constantly eat though MRE's, dehydrated/freeze dried food.

Shipping is also paid for up front, and in case of national meltdown, rarely overnight event too, however unlikely, you could pick up. Or, I could pay for horse-wagon/wood-burning cars to deliver within x radius--sriously.`

Now, impossible to foresee every situation, but reasonably speaking, is this a product you or your city friends would buy?
Click to expand...
This sounds like the ultimate scam on a gullible prepper wannabe. You get rich now off all the money they pay for this subscription, and when SHTF, there is no way for you or for them to ensure delivery of services. Like. . . how do I know this supposed stash of food even actually exists? I don't think this is a good idea. We might as well "prep" by planning to go to Walmart when SHTF and get all the stuff we need then - they keep a rotating stock of things we can use. The whole point of prepping is that we have under our control and in our possession what we need, so we do not have to rely on a failing infrastructure after a world-changing event.
 
I don't want my food stored in a location miles away I may not be able to get to in a crisis.
I generally like to hand pick my food, make sure any cans are not dented or blown in which case I don't buy them.
I don't normally bulk buy, I buy a few at a time, that way if there is something wrong with one batch I don't lose all my stored food.
 
I agree, this is the wrong audience for a service like this. Marketed to an upscale urban class might be possible, but preppers are much more hands on types that don’t want to rely on our govt or any other entity to provide for us. There are government documents that talk about shtf plans. One of them is to take over distribution centers and control the food for themselves. One even talks about using all the domestic pets as a food source. Having a large catch of food stored in one place just makes it more of a target to be taken.
 
Person said:
The essence of the ultimate prepper is: trust no one, and, flee civilization when necessary.
I am the same way. So, I figure this might not be the ideal place to ask.
Click to expand...
Ya think? :) Anyone concerned enough to be prepper sure as all heck ain't gonna trust their lives on you or any business to deliver the food we purchased for use during a crisis. Hell, I barely trust the banks and they are guaranteed by the government. Would be like me giving your company all my savings and trusting you with my retirement. Ain't gonna happen.


Person said:
But consider your friends, family, and everyone that likes to keep up on the Kardashians, that just don't want to think about, nor manage, nor regularly consume, food storage a whole bunch
Click to expand...
That is the point. These sheep don't want to think about dealing with a crisis. They expect government or someone to come save them. Last thing they are going to do is hand over money for a product they don't think they need. If they really thought they would need to care for themselves after a crisis... they'd be a prepper.

There is no market whatsoever for what you are pushing.
 
What other's said.plus.

how far would "YOU" have drive to go and get it?

Will it be there when got there?

Is your life or someone else's life worth the chance of injury or worse?

Even if the answer is yes to all of the above.you'll still be using up a extremely valuable comidty in doing so.and that be gas..
 
Person said:
Let's say you could buy bulk (low cost) food storage in grains and legumes, and the company would store it in their remote location. Would you, or people you know, buy something like this?
Click to expand...
Not No,
HELL NO!
When conditions get to the point where I REALLY need it, they won't have any way to get it to me, or me to it...if they are still in business. But they'll be well fixed for food, eating everyone's food that they have no way of delivering to their customers LOL.
 
I haven't been able to get my mind off what a terrible idea this is. Like, I literally keep thinking about it and going over it in my head and trying to make the idea even start to make sense, but every time I think about it, it just makes less and less. Sorry @Person, but this really goes against all principles of prepping I've ever heard of. It certainly goes against my instincts.
 
Might as well rely on the Federal Government to feed ya, the whole point of prepping is SELF RELIANCE, if preppers dont rely on the Government to look after there needs what the point of relying on a third party for one's needs. To a prepper your idea/plan don't make sense.
 
I just had a look at person's profile.utah is where their from. I don't even see myself making a round trip to the nearest walmart for last minute shopping trip when things start to go bad.the nearest Walmart is a 48 mile round trip.
 
bigpaul said:
a remote food storage area is called a CACHE.
Click to expand...
Yes, but a cache is a stash that only you and perhaps a few of your trusted associates knows about, hidden away in a place that you can access it when needed but will hopefully not be easily discovered by others. It is not a warehouse owned by someone else who you pay to have everything you need and provided it to you when SHTF, which is what this person is proposing.
 
huYeah, I understand, this is the wrong audience in general.

But like you all, I have primary storage. But I also think it would be smart to have a 2nd plan.

When disaster hits, the reality is farmers have surplus, and city people are starving (e.g. Bolshevik Revolution ), because no one is buying, so not sure how 10,000 years of food storage would benfit me.

All those underground bunkers companies aren't much better either because they all have a limited food supply.

Urban farms and storage are among the riskiest ideas out there. Gangs are likely to go door to door.

This is not a govt. program. In fact, maybe should set it up as a coop. You own the food. It would be there 24x7x365.

Yes, I am aware of the clause, which also states things like controlling all labor, and probably conscription:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2012-03-22/pdf/2012-7019.pdf

and the history of govt property grabs is documented:
independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=48

Anyways, no point in beating a dead horse, so here's another angle:

What about selling plots of farmland (e.g. 0.25 acre), since that would seem to feed about one person (but number is based on large scale ag. methods); but legally its unfeasible to just subdivide farms like that, so maybe selling it more as a farm land rental makes sense. E.g. reserve 1/4 acre of land for $100/mo. Exact acreage depends completely on the farm land productivity, but you get the idea. Additionally, for higher amount, you would get each years crop sent to you as well.

Is this a better idea?

Then maybe even add a shelter with micro-beds (e.g. like Japanese capsule hotel).

So, really no good safety solutions, unless you are in the Alaskan wilderness.
 
Person said:
huYeah, I understand, this is the wrong audience in general.

But like you all, I have primary storage. But I also think it would be smart to have a 2nd plan.

When disaster hits, the reality is farmers have surplus, and city people are starving (e.g. Bolshevik Revolution ), because no one is buying, so not sure how 10,000 years of food storage would benfit me.

All those underground bunkers companies aren't much better either because they all have a limited food supply.

Urban farms and storage are among the riskiest ideas out there. Gangs are likely to go door to door.

This is not a govt. program. In fact, maybe should set it up as a coop. You own the food. It would be there 24x7x365.

Yes, I am aware of the clause, which also states things like controlling all labor, and probably conscription:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2012-03-22/pdf/2012-7019.pdf

and the history of govt property grabs is documented:
independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=48

Anyways, no point in beating a dead horse, so here's another angle:

What about selling plots of farmland (e.g. 0.25 acre), since that would seem to feed about one person (but number is based on large scale ag. methods); but legally its unfeasible to just subdivide farms like that, so maybe selling it more as a farm land rental makes sense. E.g. reserve 1/4 acre of land for $100/mo. Exact acreage depends completely on the farm land productivity, but you get the idea. Additionally, for higher amount, you would get each years crop sent to you as well.

Is this a better idea?

Then maybe even add a shelter with micro-beds (e.g. like Japanese capsule hotel).

So, really no good safety solutions, unless you are in the Alaskan wilderness.
Click to expand...
I guess the next question is, where are these ideas coming from? What's the point. . . either people will prep or they won't. A quarter acre of farmland won't feed anyone who doesn't know how to grow crops.
 
I think most people think too large when thinking of growing land post SHTF, which is an occupational hazard when talking about America because the country is so big compared to "Blighty"(Britain).
i'm not thinking about acres and acres of land, would be nice, but it a Post SHTF world we will only be able to grow on the size of land we can manage and control.
I think that, especially in Britain, any growing will be of the subsistence variety, and plots of land will be small, too big and they attract unwanted attention, large growing areas will be seen for miles around.
i'm working more on the size of the traditional British "Allotment" or vegetable garden, the average size of which is 120ft by 25ft or 250 square yards, I have had several of these allotments in my lifetime, sometimes full plots sometimes half plots and it is surprising just how much one can grow on one of these plots, depending on the size of one's group or family multiples could be managed if the labour is available and especially if successive sowing and planting is done.
 
Arcticdude said:
You can raise/store a lot of your own food on the hoof too.
Click to expand...
And maybe even better, is food stored in ponds. I have a one acre pond stocked with channel catfish that are fed daily during the warm season. In that small pond there are a few thousand pounds of meat that reproduces and replaces itself... if managed properly.

Then of course you have chickens, which grow incredibly quick, reproduce in huge numbers, provide almost an egg a day when young and taste mighty fine when older. That is one food source that can be ramped up very rapidly after a crisis, with just a little planning. Only takes 8-12 weeks to raise a meat bird to maturity. My flock would go from 6 birds to over a hundred during the first few months. I even store a dc powered incubator just for this purpose.
 
Person said:
What about selling plots of farmland (e.g. 0.25 acre), since that would seem to feed about one person (but number is based on large scale ag. methods); but legally its unfeasible to just subdivide farms like that, so maybe selling it more as a farm land rental makes sense. E.g. reserve 1/4 acre of land for $100/mo. Exact acreage depends completely on the farm land productivity, but you get the idea. Additionally, for higher amount, you would get each years crop sent to you as well.

Is this a better idea?
Click to expand...
Simple answer, no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top