Exactly, F&C. I'm not a prepper, but if I were I think I would be all about risk mitigation. Having a pond full of fish is just like having that terrestrial garden full of vegetables.... they're handy, and a vital part of the equation, but they are vulnerable in that state.

Nature might intervene and decimate either or both. Predators, (both two and four legged) can impact the future harvest, and disease could wipe out any hopes for sustainability. If I were a prepper, I would absolutely consider a few ponds and garden plots to be essential. But I would hesitate to consider them to be "money in the bank" so to speak. It's just too risky in my eyes. In my opinion the ideal situation is one in which I have been harvesting that garden plot AND the pond for a few years, and have accumulated a store of food, and most importantly, have secured that food in such a manner as to afford it maximum protection.

Having food available in the garden, and swimming in my pond, would be incredibly important to my continued survival. But I would hate to have to rely solely upon that right out of the gate, when the SHTF.

Optimizing for maximum, storable, non-sustainable production in the beginning, then concentrating on a self sustaining pond would be my plan.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.