I think it's more feasible in some areas than others. In Canada, where I am, pickings would be extremely slim - in fact all the native plant food sources I can think of offhand are berries. In more southern areas I think native plants would probably meet a wider variety of dietary needs but it certainly isn't practical in the north. It's no coincidence that aboriginal Canadians' diets were much heavier on meat and fish than on plant foods. I do have some local varieties of blueberry and bunchberry in my garden but rely on "exotics" for most of my food plants.

I agree. Even though I live in one of the most fertile growing areas in the country, it would be very difficult to stick to natives and come away with a full array of food. Heck, where are carrots native to? Broccoli? Apples? Wouldn't have a clue.

One thing about natives in combination with other food plants ... if there is a crop failure in your non natives, the natives are there (usually) to provide food for that year. It is that layering and several elements with overlapping functions thing. Natives are a good backup.

Fireraven9
"The field's set. Let's croq." Alas 4/28/01

In a word, the answer, most places, would be no. Permaculture is really devising ecosystems of our choice, using observed principles of native ecologies as guidelines for setting up our own. (Which is why it is always good to try to include a zone 5.)

A great deal of the history of the world was motivated by the desire to find, grow, or trade plants and seeds from one part of the world to another. Can you imagine Ireland without potatoes, or Italy without tomatoes, both New World crops?

I doubt that most people would either be able to survive on, or want to exclusively eat, most of what is native and edible most places.

Fireraven9 makes a good point in her above post that natives are a good backup, and should surely be included in the design.

I agree with Seraphina when she says, ÂI doubt that most people would either be able to survive on, or want to exclusively eat, most of what is native and edible most places. However youÂre asking if it can be done. I would have to answer yes. Grains, in the form of amaranth or even acorns is available in most places. Cattail pollen is delicious and the entire plant is edible as well. Greens and tubers abound if you know what to hunt for year round. Mushrooms grow over the entire North American continent but you MUST be sure of IDÂs. Fruits, berries and nuts grow in most areas. Then there is smooth sumac to make a lemonade tasting drink. Some Âweeds have a sweet taste and substitute as sweeteners, same as sap from certain trees (not only maples). It would certainly require an adjustment in thinking and in some cases taste. The flavor of roasted chicory and dandelion root makes a Âcoffee like substitute but the flavor isnÂt like Folgers! A diet using the above things, along with many more plants available naturally and locally, supplemented with protein in the form fish and hunted game would be possible.

GG

There was a book I had heard about on NPR last fall about a man who for a year only ate food that was found w/in 100 miles of his home, and he lived in Arizona or NM. So it can be done if you know enough of wild edibles and such, and plan local "weeds."

If I was to do somthing like that, I would restrict myself to new world veggies even if mexico is nowhere near ohio, at least you're closer. Squash beans corn potatos and tomatoes would keep me quite happy. Plus the local weeds for greens.

I am currently redesigning my space to deal with native crops rather than struggling to grow things foreign to my garden.supposing I left my garden for 6 months due to a crisis ?I know I would find onions,J.artichokes,various fruits,spinach,beans and blueleg mushrooms.The world should look within I am an English citizen so that is how I think we say `Think global act local`

I emphatically disagree with seraphima. Of course you could survive on natives. People have done it for most of their history on earth, when we knew nothing about agriculture! People have been around for 200,000 years, and agriculture has only been known for the last 10,000 years.

Although most people here would not know edible natives beyond a few berries, it's because they simply don't know the native plants. You could survive on a vegetarian diet here with natives. It would consist of berries, fresh in summer and dried in winter, roots of camas and ferns year round, greens of fireweed and salmonberry in the spring. You can even eat the inner bark of trees in a famine. Of course, this is assuming you only mean using the plants. The native peoples here ate a lot of fish because it was very abundant and easier to get than plants.

The main problem with surviving only on natives is that it would be BORING! Common garden vegetables come from all over the world - potatoes and tomatoes from south america; carrots and broccoli from europe; apples, onions and lemons from asia. How much of your diet comes from the tropics? I know a lot of mine does. In comparison to all this diversity, of course only eating natives would be boring. But that doesn't mean you couldn't survive perfectly well on it.

I agree with caitzs, here in California the Chumash Indians lived primarly on acorns and the roots of other plants, however, the population our state currently possesses could not survive on such a diet (and I rather suspect such would be the case anywhere). As was mentioned previously, permaculture does not necessarily mean growing only natives, it means creating an ecosystem with your garden plants instead of continuing the practice of monoculture cropping developed after the industrial revolution. It also means recognizing that ornamental gardens operate under the same selection pressures as any other plant community.

JenniferP: Except for the Innu north of James Bay, The native people in Ontario did not exist mostly on meat and fish!

In Southern Ontario, the diet was based on corn, squash and beans (native to North America, exported to world), all dried for winter storage and supplemented with meat. Grains from native grasses and wild rice were eaten and many native plants have tuberous roots which were ground for flour. Tree seeds and nuts such as oak, hickory, beech, walnut, butternut were gathered.

They did live in small villages, surrounded by large forests however. Corn, beans and squash were cultivated and the other food were gathered from the land. I think the problem we would have today is growing enough on a small plot.

I like a mix of native and cultivated plants for the best yield. Yield is one of the keywords of Permaculture. The best yield for the work involved is produced by growing both types.

Fireraven9
The morns are meeker than they were,
The nuts are getting brown;
The berry's cheek is plumper,
The rose is out of town. - Emily Dickinson

Dear Caitz,

Of course it can be done; what I said is that most people would have a great deal of trouble and/or would not want to subsist on natives. Hunter-gatherer societies do not typically have large populations. They have to travel to get food, and work hard when foods are in season. Another consideration is that children, in particular, may refuse unfamiliar foods even when very hungry.
Incorporating as much native plant material as possible into Pc design is a great idea; there is much to learn from the natives as to how they survive local pests, weather, soil conditions, etc. Many native plants have healing properties, and are good to eat. I have almost an acre of native salmonberries, wild blueberries,devil's club, fiddlehead fern, etc.

Mike, please restate your interests and concerns in the light of these discussions. I would hate to waste everyone's time if your questions and concerns are not being answered. Thanks.