What Is The Purpose Of Food Storage?

[EllenMaksoud]

That was a sincere question. It may seem like I'm just trying to push buttons, but I would genuinely like to know why we as a church make it a focus. If it's to be used as a rainy day fund, why not save cash instead? If it's for natural disasters, what good does it accomplish? I've never known anybody starving in any modern disaster. If it's for the Second Coming, well then were gonna need a lot more than some food storage. I suppose we could have a EMP strike, or the dollar could collapse causing mass chaos, but I certainly don't think that's very likely.

Maybe this is the faithless cynical side of me coming out, but if something doesn't make sense to me I need to know why we do it or what benefit it provides in order for me to follow that counsel.

I don't often say this. I don't care if I live. I have no one in my life that cares like a husband would.

 

So, why would I be prepared? Truth is that if we have a big earth quake and the house falls on me, I am off the hook, no more worries. But, not everyone will die in an earth quake and perhaps as they dig through the rubble, they'll find the food and that will keep them going. And, If I am prepared and a half dozen people around me aren't, we can share the food while we wait for help.

 

If you can't understand this preparedness thing, perhaps you should reach outside yourself and your own selfishness? Truth is, I don't have a lot of food put by, but I am working on it.

[strappinglad]

In a localized emergency cash will have some value. If the power goes out in a fairly large area, how will you access your cash? If the national currency undergoes hyper inflation, ( as did that of Germany in the 1920s) , then cash is useless. I had a friend from Algeria who sold his hotel just before the troubles there a few decades ago. He brought all the cash here in a suitcase but the currency went crazy and he was left with a suitcase full of paper. He would light his cigarettes with thousand dollar notes. Let's see if we can imagine a scenario where that might happen here. Nah ! We're too big to fail !

[Traela]

In a natural disaster, it will take the government at least 3 days to get in there. (Although Waffle House restaurants will be back in business within 24 hours.). That's why secular authorities recommend that everyone have a 72-hour kit. Most large cities have NO food reserves. Have you ever seen the phenomenon of grocery stores being emptied when a big storm is predicted? What happens if the trucks can't get through the next day? Or what if the trucks get through, but power is out for an extended period? ATMs and credit cards won't work (since no one has the manual impression type readers any more). With food storage, cash can be saved for gas.

Food storage also makes it easier to help others. Food drive? Just go to the storage room and grab some cans. Natural disaster, and you are right outside the affected area? Same thing on a larger scale.

In the long term, food is one of the safest investments you can make. If you have a reserve, you can wait to buy things until they come on sale. That's money right there, even beyond the hedge against inflation. And as long as you have a can opener, you can access and use it under any conditions.

[omni]

In a natural disaster, it will take the government at least 3 days to get in there. (Although Waffle House restaurants will be back in business within 24 hours.). That's why secular authorities recommend that everyone have a 72-hour kit. Most large cities have NO food reserves. Have you ever seen the phenomenon of grocery stores being emptied when a big storm is predicted? What happens if the trucks can't get through the next day? Or what if the trucks get through, but power is out for an extended period? ATMs and credit cards won't work (since no one has the manual impression type readers any more). With food storage, cash can be saved for gas.

Food storage also makes it easier to help others. Food drive? Just go to the storage room and grab some cans. Natural disaster, and you are right outside the affected area? Same thing on a larger scale.

In the long term, food is one of the safest investments you can make. If you have a reserve, you can wait to buy things until they come on sale. That's money right there, even beyond the hedge against inflation. And as long as you have a can opener, you can access and use it under any conditions.

I don't think there's anything wrong with being prepared for a natural disaster, but why the focus on it from the church perspective? I believe there's something more to it that were missing. Why isn't the church putting that same emphasis on other secular activities such as exercising and avoiding soda, or getting regular prostate exams and mammograms, or wearing your seat belt? I could go on and on, but I'm sure these are all having a greater negative effect on the membership than natural disasters are.

[strappinglad]

Between the scientists, police and the media we already get lots of advice about those topics you present , Omni. We don't see much about food storage on a daily basis except in the aftermath of a disaster and by then it may be too late.

[thesometimesaint]

I don't think there's anything wrong with being prepared for a natural disaster, but why the focus on it from the church perspective? I believe there's something more to it that were missing. Why isn't the church putting that same emphasis on other secular activities such as exercising and avoiding soda, or getting regular prostate exams and mammograms, or wearing your seat belt? I could go on and on, but I'm sure these are all having a greater negative effect on the membership than natural disasters are.

 

The Church perspective is that we are to be prepared as possible; physically, emotionally, and spiritually for whatever comes our way. We believe in self reliance.

[The Nehor]

I consider my food storage a way of helping myself and others if something happens. I may not have to live on it for that long but if my area was cut off from food for a few weeks I could help quite a few people.

 

If it comes down to Mad Max, a leprechaun uprising, or a zombie apocalypse I expect to die or needing manna or a widow of Zarapeth situation to survive for an extended period once the food runs out from sharing.

[telnetd]

Think about where the LDS food storage culture is strongest--I would suggest along the Mormon Corridor.  This is also one of safest areas of the country in terms of natural disasters. 

 

Anyone known for storing significant amounts of food (Mormons

and other practical non-Mormons) will be the biggest prey for

thieves, so self-protection may be warranted. But in the case of

peaceful inquires, I'm pretty sure that some of most of them will

share their one or two year stash with neighbours when they 

come knocking.

 

Gail

[Sleeper Cell]

It seemed that when I was growing food storage was encouraged as a preparation for the Second Coming and the related natural disasters, but more recently I've noticed a change in emphasis towards it being more of an insurance during difficult financial times.  In this day and age is there really a need for a two-year supply of food?  In the United States and most of the world's wealthy countries the government will provide assistance in case of a natural disaster.  In poorer countries where this can't necessarily be accomplished I would think most members would be struggling to provide the basic necessities, let alone a two-year supply.  

 

This has been on my mind recently because my FIL purchased some water tanks for his food storage that cost him nearly $1000.  He has probably spent thousands more on an entire room filled with emergency supplies and freeze-dried food.  He's quite conservative and believes President Obama's re-election has "hastened the coming of the Lord".  The problem is that he is living on social security with no savings, and tens of thousands of dollars in debt.  He does not have the funds to make these purchases, but continues to do so because the brethren have asked us to.  So in your view, what is the purpose of food storage?  Why is there such a focus on it when there doesn't seem to be such a need?  When does it go from being a nice way to prepare to being a hindrance?

 

 

 

The idea that “in the United States … the government will provide assistance in case of a natural disaster;” thus there is no need for food storage, is contrary to what the government, itself, is telling us. Typically, the government recommends that people prepare to be on their own for 7-10 days, at a minimum (the recommendation used to be 72 hours).  It is one thing for the country to have the resources; quite another to be able to get the resources to the people who need them, especially if they have to be brought in from other states. Damaged roads and disrupted communications may restrict access into critically affected areas, causing further delays.  Typically, even professional emergency responders are overwhelmed during the initial stages of a disaster and may not be available for quite some time. Furthermore, one of Katrina’s “lessons learned” is that virtually no disaster response planner anywhere had seriously contemplated a disaster of that magnitude. (e.g.,  had "Katrina" been a 7.8 magnitude quake in Southern California, we probably wouldn't have done much better).  In view of all this, it is not unreasonable to store a few months of food, water and other supplies.  

 

 

Can you give me any examples of people in the U.S. who have starved to death as a result of a natural disaster in the last 50 years?

 

 

That was a sincere question. It may seem like I'm just trying to push buttons, but I would genuinely like to know why we as a church make it a focus. If it's to be used as a rainy day fund, why not save cash instead? If it's for natural disasters, what good does it accomplish? I've never known anybody starving in any modern disaster. If it's for the Second Coming, well then were gonna need a lot more than some food storage. I suppose we could have a EMP strike, or the dollar could collapse causing mass chaos, but I certainly don't think that's very likely.

Maybe this is the faithless cynical side of me coming out, but if something doesn't make sense to me I need to know why we do it or what benefit it provides in order for me to follow that counsel.

Although having some cash on hand is recommended, you can't eat cash.  It doesn't make sense to rely on the government to feed you when the government, itself, says that it may not be able to do so for the first week or more after a disaster. Water is even more critical amd cheaper to store (to pay $1000 for a couple of barrels is absurd).  IIRC, without water, kidney failure can occur in as little as 2-3 days.

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with being prepared for a natural disaster, but why the focus on it from the church perspective? I believe there's something more to it that were missing. Why isn't the church putting that same emphasis on other secular activities such as exercising and avoiding soda, or getting regular prostate exams and mammograms, or wearing your seat belt? I could go on and on, but I'm sure these are all having a greater negative effect on the membership than natural disasters are.

 

And when major disasters do occur, people bitterly complain that the government and those private organizations that provide social services (including churches) did not focus enough on disaster preparedness.  All too often, those who complain the most bitterly are those who had the ability to do some preparation but chose not to do so.

 

As mentioned by others, the news media is saturated with warnings about diet, exercise, seat belts, etc. It is hard to see that a few more warning would make any difference. On the other hand, the need for food and water storage is underemphasized in the media (except for a few “reality” shows that focus on the extreme “nut case” types   -- hardly the sort of thing that would encourage reasonable people to prepare for disasters.     

 

I have personally found that dong a reasonable amount of disaster preparedness (a little bit every year) has a significant secondary benefit.  When a disaster or terrorist warning occurs, I avoid a lot of the emotional ups and downs.  I merely check my batteries and a few other things and then go about my normal business.

[Sleeper Cell]

I don't often say this. I don't care if I live. I have no one in my life that cares like a husband would.

 

So, why would I be prepared? Truth is that if we have a big earth quake and the house falls on me, I am off the hook, no more worries. But, not everyone will die in an earth quake and perhaps as they dig through the rubble, they'll find the food and that will keep them going. And, If I am prepared and a half dozen people around me aren't, we can share the food while we wait for help.

 

If you can't understand this preparedness thing, perhaps you should reach outside yourself and your own selfishness? Truth is, I don't have a lot of food put by, but I am working on it.

 

You are absolutely right.  

 

The California shakeout scenario (catastrophic 7.8 earthquake along the San Andreas fault) is considered such a  realistically plausible scenario that it is the basis for the state‘s annual earthquake exercises. This detailed scenario projects only 2000 initial deaths.  But it also projects “50,000 injuries, $200 billion in damage and severe, long lasting disruption.”  One of the lessons learned from these exercises is that “relatively small efforts or investments made before the next earthquake could yield tremendous benefits after the earthquake.  Perhaps the biggest lesson of the Shake Out scenario is that our individual and collective decisions intertwine.  The future vitality of southern California depends on the sum of personal decisions regarding earthquake preparedness and resiliency. This sum includes everybody …”

 

-- The Shake Out Earthquake Scenario  (2008);  USGS Circular 1324 (jointly published as Calif. Geological Survey Special Report 207).  I believe it is still available online at the USGS website. 

[wenglund]

I don't think there is a single purpose behind food storage. Among several things, it can act as safety net during periods of family financial troubles. And, it can be a way of teaching a variety of useful life skills, like planning for the future, self-reliance, survival strategies, etc.,

 

I suspect that "preparation for the Second Coming" *or pending national or international doom), is like one of the least important reason behind food storage, and this because, as I see it, were everything to go south in a big way, it is unlikely that members will hold up in bunkers with guns in hand to ward of all their starving neighbors. They will likely share, and will soon run out, and then be left to draw upon the survival skills developed during the course of food storage preparation.

 

I say this as a survivor of the much ballyhooed millennial crisis in 2000.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited October 27, 2013 by wenglund

[XXMikey007]

Food storage has always really been common sense, the ant and the grasshopper scenario. The 2nd coming of the Savior will be tomorrow for some (death) or it might be hundreds if not thousands of physical years out. Your FIL made an ill purchase of water storage, someone else may make an ill purchase of a new vehicle, we all make mistakes, and we all make bad decisions. Where we put the blame is what's important.

We buy food storage every time we shop for groceries. Walking down the isle, sometimes an extra cart is required for the item with the big discount. Because of frugal shopping and looking for discounts a person in todays society can eat literally for pennies, and have some peace of mind knowing you don't have to run to the market for an item every time dinner is served.

Again, it's just good common sense, no need to point to any doomsday, or conspiracy theories.

[Tacenda]

Anyone known for storing significant amounts of food (Mormons

and other practical non-Mormons) will be the biggest prey for

thieves, so self-protection may be warranted. But in the case of

peaceful inquires, I'm pretty sure that some of most of them will

share their one or two year stash with neighbours when they

come knocking.

Gail

Makes me wonder if that's the reason LDS or Utahns are all getting gun permits. Probably to protect the majority of their food storages, but I do think they'll share some of it. But really, we should be prepared, just think of the parable of the 10 virgins.

[Kenngo1969]

I think it's time to take food storage more seriously, thanks guys. I'm also going to take note of the things we use and eat everyday and stalk up for three months.

Stalking is definitely not a good idea.  It's a crime.  http://www.le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_05_010605.htm.  However, I definitely think that stocking up on necessities is a good idea!  (Just sayin'! )  (As the noted English Professor Festus Doofus of the University of Southern Nowhere once put it, "Them homophones, they's tricky thangs!" )

 

P.S.: Sorry; couldn't resist!

Edited October 28, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

It seemed that when I was growing food storage was encouraged as a preparation for the Second Coming and the related natural disasters, but more recently I've noticed a change in emphasis towards it being more of an insurance during difficult financial times.  In this day and age is there really a need for a two-year supply of food?  In the United States and most of the world's wealthy countries the government will provide assistance in case of a natural disaster.  In poorer countries where this can't necessarily be accomplished I would think most members would be struggling to provide the basic necessities, let alone a two-year supply.  

 

This has been on my mind recently because my FIL purchased some water tanks for his food storage that cost him nearly $1000.  He has probably spent thousands more on an entire room filled with emergency supplies and freeze-dried food.  He's quite conservative and believes President Obama's re-election has "hastened the coming of the Lord".  The problem is that he is living on social security with no savings, and tens of thousands of dollars in debt.  He does not have the funds to make these purchases, but continues to do so because the brethren have asked us to.  So in your view, what is the purpose of food storage?  Why is there such a focus on it when there doesn't seem to be such a need?  When does it go from being a nice way to prepare to being a hindrance?

I had a friend (we don't talk anymore because he has lost perspective) who has a five year supply, wants a Generator big enough to keep his house on line forever. He only deals in cash for fear of being tracked by the Feds. Our friendship went South when he wanted my to read a book by Roger K Young (which is little more than quoting GA's in order to frighten people into buying into what he sales)...when I told him I have read it and told him that he is loosing sight of Spiritual things over temporal matters, he then sees me as not following the Lord's counsel. We do need to be prepared, but being Spiritually prepared is more important...IMHO

[Kenngo1969]

I don't think there's anything wrong with being prepared for a natural disaster, but why the focus on it from the church perspective? I believe there's something more to it that were missing. Why isn't the church putting that same emphasis on other secular activities such as exercising and avoiding soda, or getting regular prostate exams and mammograms, or wearing your seat belt? I could go on and on, but I'm sure these are all having a greater negative effect on the membership than natural disasters are.

Doctrine & Covenants 58:26.  http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/58.26.  We can debate all day long how come we don't do a better job of it, but we're expected to listen to our doctors and others who have a stake in our well being, as well.

[Tacenda]

Stalking is definitely not a good idea. It's a crime. http://www.le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_05_010605.htm. However, I definitely think that stocking up on necessities is a good idea! (Just sayin'! ) (As the noted English Professor Festus Doofus of the University of Southern Nowhere once put it, "Them homophones, they's tricky thangs!" )

P.S.: Sorry; couldn't resist!

Thanks Professor Kenngo!

[omni]

The idea that “in the United States … the government will provide assistance in case of a natural disaster;” thus there is no need for food storage, is contrary to what the government, itself, is telling us. Typically, the government recommends that people prepare to be on their own for 7-10 days, at a minimum (the recommendation used to be 72 hours).  It is one thing for the country to have the resources; quite another to be able to get the resources to the people who need them, especially if they have to be brought in from other states. Damaged roads and disrupted communications may restrict access into critically affected areas, causing further delays.  Typically, even professional emergency responders are overwhelmed during the initial stages of a disaster and may not be available for quite some time. Furthermore, one of Katrina’s “lessons learned” is that virtually no disaster response planner anywhere had seriously contemplated a disaster of that magnitude. (e.g.,  had "Katrina" been a 7.8 magnitude quake in Southern California, we probably wouldn't have done much better).  In view of all this, it is not unreasonable to store a few months of food, water and other supplies.

I think the key part of that is the time table you mentioned of 72 hrs or a max of 7-10 days. This was determined by experts in the field who have studied past disasters and are aware of the government resources abilities. Are you aware of any instances since the directive from our prophets in which a member of the church's life has been spared after a natural disaster because they had a year supply of food storage? Do you foresee anything likely to happen in your lifetime that would require a one-year or even a three-month supply?

[sunstoned]

In a natural disaster, it will take the government at least 3 days to get in there. (Although Waffle House restaurants will be back in business within 24 hours.). That's why secular authorities recommend that everyone have a 72-hour kit. Most large cities have NO food reserves. Have you ever seen the phenomenon of grocery stores being emptied when a big storm is predicted? What happens if the trucks can't get through the next day? Or what if the trucks get through, but power is out for an extended period? ATMs and credit cards won't work (since no one has the manual impression type readers any more). With food storage, cash can be saved for gas.

Food storage also makes it easier to help others. Food drive? Just go to the storage room and grab some cans. Natural disaster, and you are right outside the affected area? Same thing on a larger scale.

In the long term, food is one of the safest investments you can make. If you have a reserve, you can wait to buy things until they come on sale. That's money right there, even beyond the hedge against inflation. And as long as you have a can opener, you can access and use it under any conditions.

I think a 72 hour (get out of Dodge) kit is an excellent idea.  It is portable and will help tide you over as you evacuate or until help arrives. Just looking back at the major disasters that have happened in the U.S. in the last 50 it is clear that having such a kit would be an asset.  Having a large cache of food, not so much. 

Edited October 28, 2013 by sunstoned

[Alan]

Joining this thread late.

I have a different take on food storage than most people I know. I believe it is instruction for those of little faith. The Lord knows that many of his disciples do not have sufficient faith to trust him fully right now, so he has given us a lesser law.

In the Bible, and in the Book of Mormon, and in the D&C (three times take note) he gives us his higher law. It is that we are to take no thought for food, drink or clothing. None at all. He even goes on to explain that he feeds the birds ok, even though they don't sow or reap, or gather into barns and that we are much more important than them.

 

Personally, I believe it is morally indefensible to hoard food when many in this world are starving. The money we spend on amassing food could be given to those who provide for the starving, and would make an immediate difference. It would quite literally save lives.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Alan

[Hamba Tuhan]

f something doesn't make sense to me I need to know why we do it or what benefit it provides in order for me to follow that counsel.

 

Sis Oscarson from the latest General Conference:

 

Sometimes we try to do it backward. For example, we may take this approach: I will be happy to live the law of tithing, but first I need to know that it’s true. Maybe we even pray to gain a testimony of the law of tithing and hope the Lord will bless us with that testimony before we have ever filled out a tithing slip. It just doesn’t work that way. The Lord expects us to exercise faith. We have to consistently pay a full and honest tithe in order to gain a testimony of tithing. This same pattern applies to all the principles of the gospel, whether it is the law of chastity, the principle of modesty, the Word of Wisdom, or the law of the fast.

 

Edited October 28, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[Kenngo1969]

Thanks Professor Kenngo!

Oh, no, no, My Dear!  You don't understand!  I would never plagiarize from The Great Professor Doofus!  That would be very wrong!

[Kenngo1969]

I think the key part of that is the time table you mentioned of 72 hrs or a max of 7-10 days. This was determined by experts in the field who have studied past disasters and are aware of the government resources abilities. Are you aware of any instances since the directive from our prophets in which a member of the church's life has been spared after a natural disaster because they had a year supply of food storage? Do you foresee anything likely to happen in your lifetime that would require a one-year or even a three-month supply?

As Rongo has pointed out, food storage isn't just for natural disasters, civil unrest, or other things that are unlikely to occur in any given single area at any given time.  It's also for periods of un- and underemployment.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

Joining this thread late.

I have a different take on food storage than most people I know. I believe it is instruction for those of little faith. The Lord knows that many of his disciples do not have sufficient faith to trust him fully right now, so he has given us a lesser law.

In the Bible, and in the Book of Mormon, and in the D&C (three times take note) he gives us his higher law. It is that we are to take no thought for food, drink or clothing. None at all. He even goes on to explain that he feeds the birds ok, even though they don't sow or reap, or gather into barns and that we are much more important than them. ...

 

OK.  You're right; that is an interesting take.  I always understood the "take no thought" instruction to apply to a certain subset of the membership of the Church of Jesus Christ (those who've been called full-time or almost full-time to the ministry) rather than to the Church as a whole.  So ...  how do you reconcile the concurrence of the two laws, then?  That is to say, how do you reconcile the fact that, according to your paradigm, both a so-called "greater" and a so-called "lesser" law apparently are in force at the same time, when in all other cases that I can think of off hand, the Lord rescinded a lesser law when He instituted a greater one (the former being superseded by the latter)?  And do you think Joseph of Egypt was actually demonstrating a lack of faith when he counseled Pharaoh to lay up provisions in store against famine, and that counsel later enabled Joseph to save the rest of his family?

 

Personally, I believe it is morally indefensible to hoard food when many in this world are starving. The money we spend on amassing food could be given to those who provide for the starving, and would make an immediate difference. It would quite literally save lives.

 

Well, you're in luck!  The Lord, in His Omniscience and Foresight, has commanded us to both lay up food and other provisions against a day of want and to obey the Law of the Fast by fasting one day a month and donating what would have been spent on food (or more, if we are able) for a Fast Offering.  I hereby release you from your moral quandary relative to the former command!

Edited October 29, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

I consider my food storage a way of helping myself and others if something happens. I may not have to live on it for that long but if my area was cut off from food for a few weeks I could help quite a few people.

 

If it comes down to Mad Max, a leprechaun uprising, or a zombie apocalypse I expect to die or needing manna or a widow of Zarapeth situation to survive for an extended period once the food runs out from sharing.

Of those potential forms of unrest, I prefer the leprechaun uprising.  I think that'd be way kewel!