In the book, “Survive the savage sea”, by Dougal Robertson, the author and his family survive in a lifeboat and fiberglass dingy for 38 days. After 17 days the lifeboat sank, so they just had the dingy. With 6 people in the dingy they had 6 inches of “freeboard”.
They had a small sail so they were moving slowly through the water. Sucker fish clamped on for the ride through the ocean. These fish attracted larger fish and turtles. The larger fish and turtles would bang the bottom of the rubber raft while trying to get the succer-fish and other fish. This made it hard for the humans to sleep; however, they were able to live off catching fish and turtles. Mostly turtles that they just caught by hand.
It turns out that anything floating slowly in the ocean can attract fish. Fisherman even make deliberate “Fish aggregating devices”. Looking at these I think most seasteads will qualify.
A seastead is going to be much larger than the Robertson dingy, and I think act as a much larger fish aggregating device. There should be lots of fish in the area. So I think a family fishing around a single-family-seastead could have a rather easy time of catching fish.
Excellent concept, Vince. This got me thinking of how much more attraction there would be if you factored in filled mariculture nets, with the movement and waste produced by the fish. There could be a marketable service of collecting the sea life (especially the turtles and other more exotic creatures) and seperating them into a different area and selling them on land to aquariums and individuals. Just thoughts right now, but perhaps something to ponder.
Thor Heyerdahl made the same observations in Kon Tiki, Ra’s I and II about the fact that drifting or slow moving objects tend to ‘create’ their own ecosystem of fish and other species feed on each other. A large enough structure could easily sustain a family or two without any deliberate action on their part…
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
The forum ‘Infrastructure’ is closed to new topics and replies.