This is great scientific, investigative work, Shad. I still don’t understand why some people would get defensive about stating they produce all their family’s protein supply.
After reading your figures above it seems quite illogical that a “diehard homesteader” (
my name for one who lives completely off the land) could realistically keep that number of chickens for food. First of all, I don’t think those 400+ chickens could be provided a “proper” nutritional diet to be the healthiest they could be and provide the best nutritional carcass. And I don’t think that these 400+ chickens could be provided proper and adequate housing, leaving a certain percentage of them vulnerable to predation and their number exponentially short.
I am not a diehard homesteader by any stretch and so far have only used excess cock/erals for meat. (So far I have only had a total of 3 hens die: 2 euthanized, 1 found dead, and I was more concerned with what was going on inside them than I was with making a meal out of them.

) However, we do have deer on our land and will process one occasionally and put it in the freezer.
Unfortunately I guess my family would be termed to be on the gluttonous side because I’m not sure one chicken would provide each member food for a week.

When the food tastes good we just like to eat.
I am going to assume

eek:not a smart thing, I know) that people who raise chickens to feed their families most likely also raise beef, pork, etc. to supplement their nutritional needs.
Of course all this is just from my pea-brain way of thinking and I thought I’d share a pea or two.