Connect with us


The Surprising Natural Survival Food You Didn’t Know Was Edible

natural survival food

There’s a ton of natural survival food that’s getting a lot of attention. However, there’s very few foods that are more “natural” than what I’m about to show you.

Think about it. When SHTF and it’s TEOTWAWKI, everyone’s going to be grabbing for the same types of food. I’m talking about things like bread, meats, eggs…you get the picture. Pretty soon, the grocery store shelves will be completely barren. And after that, families will have to fend for themselves. It’s not a pretty picture.

When this emergency situation occurs, it’ll be more important than ever before to be able to opt for natural survival foods. To be more specific, I’m talking about foods that live in nature. 

By focusing your efforts on learning about what’s edible, you can step out of your backyard and find food almost anywhere. This is an excellent option, since you won’t have to pay for any of it like you’ll have to in a grocery store. Better yet, most people will be so busy thinking about scavenging the grocery store aisles that they won’t even consider the foods found in the great outdoors.

Now don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying you shouldn’t stock up on survival food, or should stop going to the grocery store. That would be silly (and ineffective) for your chances at survival. However, by being knowledgable about what natural survival food is out there, you’re more likely to stay fed.

And there’s one natural survival food I’m especially happy to bring your attention to. And that’s…

The Surprising Natural Survival Food You Didn’t Know Was Edible

Many of you will be surprised to know that tree bark is an edible, natural survival food! Now although this may seem like a food better left to spiders and other creepy crawlies, hear me out. It’s more than likely you’ve been eating tree bark your entire life!

For example, do you enjoy eating apple pies? How about cinnamon pastries? Well, if so, these are more than likely dusted with natural cinnamon. And, as some of you know, cinnamon is actually bark from the Cinnamomum tree.

Cinnamon isn’t the only type of edible bark, either. Scots pine has fed people for generations, as has birch bark. In fact, the combination of birch bark and flour fed people after World War I. This was to add longevity to the rations.

Now keep in mind that most edible bark is not on the outside of the tree. For example, edible pine bark layers are under the first few outer layers. This is where water and nutrients funnel through the tree. This process lends itself to a tender, great tasting food that’s chock-full of nutrients.

Now the question is: How do you get to that inner, tender bark? One of the best ways is to scrape away at the outer layers using a sharp tool, such as a survival knife. According to Off The Grid News, “The layer clinging to the tough inner wood is the softest and juiciest as it has the phloem, the food-carrying tissue. Take care to take only narrow vertical portions of bark from the trees. Removing a ring of bark can kill the mightiest of trees, as it cuts off the food and water transport between the roots and the rest of the tree.”

If you’re still skeptical, I invite you to watch the video below of a man eating bark straight from a Pine tree.

Now the question on many preppers’ minds is, “What all can I do with tree bark?” After all, you want the resources you have to be sustainable, as well as multi-use. Here’s some tips from Off The Grid News that’ll help:

1. Eat it raw

For a quick refreshing snack, the cambium tissue can be eaten raw. It would be some exercise for the jaws, and you’ll probably have to spit out the stringy remains after all the juices have been eked out. Eating raw bark may not provide you sufficient sustenance unless you have other food items to go with it.

2. Boil the bark

If you have a pot of water boiling over a fire, shred the soft bark into thin strips and add them in. It removes the pitch flavor to some extent, and, if you have used only the softest of tissues, your thin soup will be full of slightly more satisfying bits to skim off with a twig to pacify a rumbling tummy.

3. Make bark chips

Thin strips of the bark can be dry roasted to a light brown color for crunchy snack bites. They may be the nearest you can get to potato chips in some situations. They are said to taste one notch better when fried in a bit of oil or butter, but then you need to have it handy along with a frying pan.

4. Make some bark flour

Dry the bits of bark over the fire and pound it to a powder. If you’re fortunate enough to catch some wild game for roasting, the bark flour may add some extra nutrition to the meal.

All of us need survival skills in our kitty, because disaster often strikes unexpectedly. If you happen to come across freshly logged pine, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to practice your skills at peeling the outer bark and getting to the soft, light-colored inner bark. You can try chewing it raw; you may end up liking the slightly sweet taste in spite of the typical pine-pitch flavor.

Pine bark is not the only edible bark, but they are abundant and considered more or less safe. The bark of white birch can be eaten in the same way, or made into flour for making bread as the people in northern Europe did. These trees are easy to identify due to their characteristic bark color and design. The black birch, also called sweet birch, is another source of edible bark.

Slippery elm and spruce are other candidates, but you must learn to identify the trees correctly, as some contain deadly toxins. For example, all parts of yew trees – except the fleshy part of the fruit – are toxic, but the trees look very similar to spruce.

The next time you go camping near a wild spot, hone your skills at identifying trees and extracting edible bark.


Former Democrat Tops NH Trump VP Poll


In an electrifying and unexpected development, a new poll from the University of New Hampshire Survey Center reveals that former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii tops the list of preferred running mates for former President Donald Trump. This strategic choice underscores Trump’s commitment to broadening his appeal and strengthening his base with an unconventional but highly effective candidate.

Tulsi Gabbard, who initially ran for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, courageously left her party two years later to become an independent. Now, she emerges as the favorite among nearly a quarter (24%) of New Hampshire voters who are not supporting President Biden. Gabbard’s ability to connect with a diverse electorate and her staunch opposition to the far-left agenda make her a powerful ally for Trump.

Gabbard’s support stands seven points ahead of biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, indicating a strong preference for Gabbard’s unique blend of political independence and principled leadership. This shows that voters are looking for leaders who are willing to stand up against the establishment and fight for American values.

Ramaswamy, along with other notable figures like Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, have endorsed Trump, yet Gabbard’s lead suggests a deeper resonance with voters seeking a fresh and unifying voice. Her conservative principles, military background, and dedication to freedom and the Constitution make her an ideal running mate for Trump.

Trump’s consideration of Gabbard is a testament to his strategic thinking and commitment to broadening his appeal. Gabbard, a veteran of the Iraq War and an officer in the Hawaii National Guard, brings a wealth of experience and a compelling personal story as the first Samoan-American elected to Congress. Her transition from a progressive Democrat to an independent has been marked by her steadfast dedication to fundamental freedoms, resonating with many conservatives who feel disenfranchised by the current political climate.

In a Fox News town hall in February, Trump hinted that Gabbard was on his short list for running mates. Her praise for Trump, acknowledging his resilience and willingness to fight against the Washington establishment, underscores a shared commitment to challenging the status quo and defending American values against the encroachment of socialism and government overreach.

Gabbard’s familiarity with New Hampshire, a crucial swing state, adds another layer of strategic advantage. Her presence in the state during her 2020 presidential run and her support for Republican candidates in 2022 have cemented her popularity among voters who are tired of the same old politics and crave genuine change.

By considering Gabbard as a running mate, Trump demonstrates his ability to think outside traditional party lines and appeal to a broader coalition. This bold move could be the key to uniting the nation behind his campaign, bringing together a diverse group of voters eager for a leader who prioritizes American values and freedoms.

As the 2024 election approaches, the prospect of a Trump-Gabbard ticket promises an exciting and dynamic campaign. This powerful combination of leadership, experience, and dedication to conservative principles is poised to capture the imagination and support of Americans from all walks of life, ensuring a strong and united front against the progressive agenda threatening our nation’s future.


POLL: Would you support Tulsi Gabbard for VP?


Continue Reading


SCOTUS Sides With “Three Strikes” Laws in Support of Second Amendment


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 on May 23 in favor of the federal government in a case pivotal to the enforcement of a federal three-strikes gun law aimed at ensuring repeat offenders are appropriately penalized. This ruling reinforces the principle that those who repeatedly break the law, particularly with violent felonies or major drug offenses, should face stringent consequences, thereby protecting law-abiding citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

Justice Samuel Alito, a stalwart defender of constitutional principles, authored the majority opinion in Brown v. United States, consolidated with Jackson v. United States. In a remarkable alignment, the decision saw a blending of ideologies, with one liberal justice joining the majority and a conservative justice siding with the dissenters. This highlights the importance and clarity of the case beyond traditional ideological divides.

Federal law rightly prohibits convicted felons from possessing firearms, and the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) of 1984 was a significant step to address the disproportionate number of crimes committed by repeat offenders. The ACCA mandates a 15-year minimum sentence for individuals found guilty of illegally possessing a firearm if they have three or more prior convictions for serious drug offenses or violent felonies committed on separate occasions.

The recent Supreme Court ruling ensures that the severity of the law remains intact. It emphasizes that sentences under the ACCA should be based on the laws in effect at the time of the original convictions, maintaining the law’s integrity and original intent to deter habitual criminals. This is a win for those who believe in the Second Amendment and the rule of law, ensuring that dangerous individuals are kept from undermining our right to bear arms.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett stood firm in the majority, reflecting their commitment to upholding strict penalties for career criminals. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joined parts of the dissent, showcasing the robust debate within the court. Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, known for their liberal leanings, also contributed to the discourse.

Justice Alito’s opinion clarified that the ACCA’s requirement for a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence remains for those convicted of illegal firearm possession if they have a history of serious drug offenses or violent felonies. The definition of a “serious drug offense” includes state crimes that carry a maximum sentence of at least 10 years and involve a controlled substance as defined by the Controlled Substances Act.

Alito highlighted that state crimes qualify as serious drug offenses if they involved a drug listed on federal schedules at the time of the original conviction, not based on any subsequent changes to those schedules. This prevents loopholes that could otherwise allow habitual offenders to evade justice based on technicalities, thus preserving the stringent measures intended by the ACCA.

The government’s interpretation aligns with the ACCA’s objectives, focusing on the inherent risk and seriousness of certain offenses likely committed by career criminals. This approach ensures that those with a history of significant drug or violent offenses face enhanced penalties, protecting society and upholding the sanctity of the Second Amendment by ensuring firearms do not end up in the hands of dangerous individuals.

Justice Jackson’s dissent argued for applying the drug schedules in effect at the time of the federal firearms offense, a perspective that the majority rightly found unconvincing given the ACCA’s clear intent and context.

This ruling follows the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in March 2022’s Wooden v. United States, affirming that multiple convictions from a single criminal episode do not count as multiple under the ACCA. The current deliberations on Erlinger v. United States, which question whether a judge or jury should decide on the application of enhanced sentencing, continue to underscore the Court’s dedication to ensuring fair yet firm justice.

In summary, the Supreme Court’s decision is a significant victory for the pro-Second Amendment community, reinforcing the importance of strict penalties for repeat offenders. This decision ensures that the rights of law-abiding citizens to bear arms are protected by keeping firearms out of the hands of those who pose a danger to society.


Supreme Court: Illegal Immgrants Can Be Detained Without Bond

POLL: Do you support this ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States?


Continue Reading


HILARIOUS: Biden Not On the Ballot in Ohio… Yet


In a delicious twist of irony, President Biden—who has tried to block former President Trump from appearing on ballots in several states—might himself be excluded from the Ohio ballot come Election Day. Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose issued this hilarious warning on Tuesday, showcasing yet another instance of Democratic incompetence and hypocrisy.

Despite receiving weeks of warnings from LaRose’s office and the state legislature, the Ohio Democratic Party has hilariously bungled their way into potentially disqualifying Biden from the ballot. LaRose, a Republican, pointed out that the Democratic Party has yet to offer any solution that complies with existing law.

Ohio’s election law requires parties to certify their presidential candidates at least 90 days before Election Day. But in a move that screams “amateur hour,” the Democratic Party plans to certify Biden at its national convention in Wisconsin on August 19, just 75 days before the election—blatantly flouting the law.

“I’ve said from here to Colorado that it’s in the best interest of voters to have a choice in the race for president. I’m also duty-bound to follow the law as Ohio’s chief elections officer,” LaRose stated, barely containing his exasperation.

“As it stands today, the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee will not be on the Ohio ballot. That is not my choice. It’s due to a conflict in the law created by the party, and the party has so far offered no legally acceptable remedy,” he continued, likely shaking his head in disbelief.

“The Ohio House speaker said today there won’t be a legislative solution, so I’ve sent a letter to Ohio Democrats’ chair seeking (again) a solution that upholds the law and respects the voters. I trust they’ll act quickly,” he finished, probably chuckling at the absurdity of it all.

Ohio Democrats previously floated the idea that Ohio could accept a “provisional certification” for Biden’s candidacy, but LaRose quickly shut down this laughable suggestion, pointing out that state law makes no such allowances.

LaRose emphasized that either the state legislature must change the law to allow Biden’s certification, or the Democratic Party must get its act together. Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens, another Republican, bluntly stated that lawmakers won’t bail Biden out. “There’s just not the will to do that from the legislature,” Stephens told reporters, likely with a smirk.

Even Democratic Ohio House Minority Leader Allison Russo couldn’t hide her frustration with her own party’s ineptitude, stating, “We’ve seen the dysfunction here in this place. And I think we’ve seen that folks have not been able to put aside partisanship and hyper-partisanship and infighting.… I think at this point, you’re probably going to see either, you know, some sort of inner party effects or perhaps court action.”

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine assured voters that Biden would be on the ballot come November, arguing that if the legislature doesn’t act, then it’s “going to be done by the court.”

Ohio Democrats have yet to respond to LaRose’s Tuesday letter. The irony of Biden’s predicament—potentially being excluded from the ballot while having sought to exclude Trump—is nothing short of poetic justice. This fiasco is a fitting testament to the chaos and mismanagement that has become the hallmark of the Democratic Party.



POLL: Will Biden be the Democrat nominee in November?


Continue Reading