*****************
ReHerakhte
(Continuation of Agriculture info)
Farming was a matter of numbers. While most peasant farmers may have been illiterate, they knew how to count. They knew that wheat would yield 250 to 300 liters of grain per acre (modern famring methods, on the same land, yield over 1,500 liters of grain per acre.) Barley would bring 700-720 liters per acre. The higher yield for barley was partially the nature of the plant, plus the fact that you put 72 liters of seed into each acre of wheat and 144 liters per acre of barley. Oats yielded 360-400 liters an acre, for 108 liters of seed. Peas, an important diet suppllement and protien source, gave 300-340 liters per acre, for 108 liters of seed. Flax and hemp was also grown, to provide rawmaterial for linen and rope.
Depending on the nature of the land, the size of the farmers holdings, local weather conditions, and drinking habits, about half the land would be sown in barley. In ale drinking areas (most of England and large parts of France), barley would be needed for making ale. Barley was also a more productive grain, even though it produced a less tasty meal than wheat. A third (or more) of the land would be planted in wheat. The remainder would go for peas and oats. Grain yields of slightly under four times seed grain sown were the norm until the 18th century. There, another burst of innovation brought productivity to ten times seed sown.. In the 20th century, this rose to twenty times.
Oddly enough, agricultural experimentation did take place in Medieval times, often at abbeys under the superviion of monks (who were the Medieval scholars and scientists.) Consistant yields of eight times seed sown were reported. But the Medieval period was one of poor communications and strong traditions. The new techniques were not broadcast far and wide and, even if they were, most farmers would be reluctant to change their ancient (and reliable) methods. Moreover, some of the methods, such as using much higher doses of animal manure, were not always possible because there would not have been enough domestic animals available to produce the needed manure. But some of the new techniques, such as denser planting to crowd out weeds, would have worked widely. One could say that the agricultural "reforms" of the 18th century were basically a side effect of the "Age of Enlightenment," whereby the new was given equal opportunity with the traditional.
In England, the idea farm size for a family was a "yardland" (24-30 acres) in size. Only about a quarter of the English farm families had this much land (or a bit more) before the Bubonic Plague , most had ten or fewer. Those farmers possessing a yardland were able to work their land efficiently enough to feed themselves and prodice a surplus for sale. Wheat grain could be sold for about 40 ducats a bushel. Barley went for 25-30 ducats a bushel and peas for 15-20 ducats a bushel. In a good year, a yardland of crops could generate grain for sale that would bring 1,500-2,000 ducats. Another thousand ducats could be obtained by selling off cheese, wool, honey, sheep, eggs, fruit and vegetables. Some of this profit was saved, some was spent on repairing or replacing farm equipment and the some went for household neccessities (utensils, salt , furnishings) or luxuries. But a lot went to pay taxes and fees. There were a lot of these. The principal one was the land rent, which varied quite a lot. A rough annual average would be 10-50 ducats per acre. In addition to this there might be payments of a percentage of the main crop, as well as a percentage of the wool taken from sheep (that often grazed on the overlords land.). There were fees for taking over as a new tenant (as when the existing tenant died and his son took over) and fees for the use of the landlords meadows for grazing sheep and forests for taking wood, nuts and berrys. The miller charged 4-5 percent of the grain to grind it into flour.
A prudent farmer put aside grain and coin for hard times. While the overlords were supposed to keep reserves of grain for hard times, this was sometimes not the case or the reserves were not adequate.
Many farmers knew that for anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand ducats per acre they could purchase better lease terms on their land, or buy the land outright.. Thus the farmer families that were efficient and frugal for generation after generation, eventually found themselves land owners, members of the minir gentry and, eventually, part of the nobility.
Medieval farmers did more than just grow grain and peas. Most farmers had one or more horses and oxen, two or more milk cows, a few pigs, several dozen sheep or goats, beehives and some chickens. Many farmers kept geese as well. The horses and/or oxen pulled the plow and did other heavy work. The cows supplied milk, most of which was turned into cheese. The pigs were fattened to supply the main course for major feasts. The sheep supplied wool, which was spun into cloth for the families clothes. The chickens supplied eggs and meat to liven up the diet of peas and porridge.
There would also be up to an acre or more in vegetables. During the Summer and Fall, the vegetable garden made meals most palatable. Hemp and flax were also grown, to provide materials for clothing, household goods and tools. There might also be apple or pear trees on the farm, that would yield fruit. In many parts of Europe, apples produced a potent cider, which made the dreary Winter weather more palatable. By Spring, however, food supplies would usually be low, which made Lent as much a virtue as a necessity.
The larger the farm, the more different activities there would be. These yardland farmers thus had need of additional labor and would hire farmers of smaller plots. The hired help would cost three to ten ducats a day (depending on the productivity of the worker) plus meals (a few more ducats a day). Specialized work, like re-thatching the farmers house, would run to about ten ducats a day for the thatcher, and 4-5 ducats a day for his assistant. And you had to feed them. Some well off farmers had one or more live in servants. These were relatively cheap, costing as little as 100-250 ducats a year (plus room and board, which could add up to more than the wages. Servants were often the older children of less well off farmers. Afther the Plague, servant's wages went up, as did their maintenance. The hired help demanded better food and lodging, and generally got it once the Plague had created a shortage of servants.
The farmer also had to deal with the church and he usually had to pay a title (ten percent) of all produce to the cleric (abbot or bishop) who presided over the manor, plus the usual land rents. The tithing was generally not resented, because the church tended to maintain reserves of grain. In times of need, the faithful to called on the church for relief and, if it was available, it was generally forthcoming. The church preached charity and, in times of need, tended to practice what it preached.
For the majority of farmers who had small holdings, life was much less secure. An acre of barley could, in an average year, produce about 500 liters of grain (after making allowances for taxes and seed for the next crop). This was enough to feed one adult for a year at a very basic level. A farmer with a wife and two children could get along with five acres. Everyone would have to work, especially for other sources of food like the vegetable garden and rummaging in the woods for mushrooms, nuts, and berries. But a five acre holding left little margin for bad weather. Several bad years in succession could lead to widespread famine: in England alone 10-15 percent of the population perished from starvation or the effects of malnutrition as a result of a series of unusually wet, cold years from 1315 through 1318.caused a succession of bad harvests. Most of the dead were the farmers with less land. Naturally, there was more land available for the survivors. After the Plague, there was plenty of land, and most European nations date their "national costumes" (from the "good old days") from the centuries following the Plague, when the peasantry prospered because there were many fewer people but the same amount of farmland.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Rainbow Six
Date: 07/31/2002 05:34
Just an idle thought that ocurred to me....
Why would the troops return to Norfolk?
Norfolk was nuked. Surely the place would still be radiocative rubble, the port faclilities ruined, and anyone landing there would eventually end up glowing in the dark?
Wouldn’t the fleet make landfall somewhere else on the Eastern seaboard?
Sorry if I’m being pedantic here....
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Nick Butta
Date: 07/31/2002 05:52
Rainbow Six has a very very good point - why Norfolk. As an Aussie I can kind of guess where it is but I have no idea what’s there. Although I know there’s coal in Virginia since the weekends happy news.
Thanks to those who provided info on food production. My guess is that maybe 2/3 of people would have to work to feed the population given low levels of skills, loss of machinery and other things like fertilizer.
That’s still 160K people who could be producing something to re-create civilisation. That’s a lot of coal even if dug by hand. I guess the real limits are based on what the skill mix of the people you’ve got is.....
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Snake Eyes
Date: 07/31/2002 06:21
Rainbow Six pondered: <<<Wouldn’t the fleet make landfall somewhere else on the Eastern seaboard? >>>
I didn’t have access to Howling Wilderness at the time I played this out, but (with what I did have) figuring that New England had descended into anarchy and that Norkfolk would be a sheet of bubbling glass, I split the returning fleet between Cape May, NJ, Charleston, SC, and Savannah, GA. I’m not sure I would change this now that I have read Howling Wilderness. YMMV.
~ Snake Eyes
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Paul Mulcahy
Date: 07/31/2002 09:29
"Although I know there’s coal in Virginia since the weekends happy news."
Although you’re right that there is a lot of coal production in Virginia, the story you are referring to took place in Pennsylvania.
________________________________________
Subject: Operation Omega
Posted by: TR
Date: 07/31/2002 11:26
Operation OMEGA was always one of those topics I felt was never really explored too greatly... there a lot of variables no one ever truly considered.
For example a lot of military personnel have family, friends in other states than where they would be landing. Despite hearing that these areas may have been nuked they would want to go back and look for them. Granted these numbers would not be large compared to the whole of the numbers rolling off the boats... So you’d have numbers of troops with varying degrees of weapons and equipment roaming the country trying to get home.
There would be a certain level of stigma and suspicion when the troops came back. The civilian population in the US has run into marauders, raiders, Milgov and Civgov troops. Now they would have large numbers of troops landing in various states. Of course Milgov and Civgov would be fighting over each other to get to these states first to recruit the troops to their cause. Of course the troops might decide NEITHER government is legitimate and form a thrid group to fill the void.
Of course there are going to problems with agriculture production being able to meet the need. We have lost so many family farms in the states since the 1980’s we would be looking at reclaiming lands and a shortage of experienced farmers... I would imagine though with enough time and incentive the governments could bring in "experts" to help train the locals in agricultural methods and so forth. And of course any large scale agricultural production will draw the attention of maraduers. So naturally there will need to be forces in the area to track down and remove such groups.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
TR
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Cav Scout
Date: 07/31/2002 12:26
>>For example a lot of military personnel have family, friends in other states than where they would be landing. Despite hearing that these areas may have been nuked they would want to go back and look for them. Granted these numbers would not be large compared to the whole of the numbers rolling off the boats... So you’d have numbers of troops with varying degrees of weapons and equipment roaming the country trying to get home. <<
Assuming that suppressing marauders and New America collectively represent a sort of counter-insurgency operation, I would think there would be some hearts-and-minds sort of utility to sending various National Guard units back to garrison their home states, when possible. (Note -- I usually assume that circa 2000 most NG units are still made up of 40-50% original personnel, with the remainder being replacements from anywhere.)
Coming off the boats from Op Omega you could generate relatively strong garrison for Pennsylvania (28th ID, plus, IIRC, one of the USAR brigades making up the 43rd Division*), plus a brigade or so each for some southern states (Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, the Carolinas). The same could be done for some of midwestern states if a means could be found to get the troops there.
On the other hand, the desire might be to send units which still have a regional identity as far from where they were raised as possible, on the assumption guys from Florida won’t desert if they’re stationed in Maine, etc.
* 43rd Infantry Division is a big mess. Of its three brigades, one (205th) was actually the round-out for 6th ID(L), and another (187th) was the Cold War-era Iceland Defense Force. This leaves 157th Mech Bde, which, if I remember right, was from the Pennsylvania area.
>>I would imagine though with enough time and incentive the governments could bring in "experts" to help train the locals in agricultural methods and so forth. And of course any large scale agricultural production will draw the attention of maraduers. So naturally there will need to be forces in the area to track down and remove such groups.<<
Would make a cool campaign, I think, to have some of the European returnees organized into Special Forces style teams, trained up with additional skills not on the current SF syllabus (i.e. farming, tractor repair, aquaculture, etc.) and sent out to the perimeters of MilGov or CivGov controlled areas to stabilize regions, both by getting food production up but also by organizing, training, and leading local militia in bandit and/or New America suppression missions, etc.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: LDD
Date: 07/31/2002 13:04
I’m inclined to think quite a few of the returning troops would be heading for home as soon as they got off the boats.
Many, having found out just how much anarcy rules the country from salors on the trip home would no doubt be planning to hot foot it for home to see if there family is still alive.
Still others have no doubt just "had enough" any of the older "vets" who had made it back from the hell that central europe has become would most likely tell higher command to "get stuffed" upon there return.
However, many of the departing troops would probably return to military service once they found there family dead/gone, homes/towns destroyed and no real way to make a living other then military service IMHO.
My player group sort of took the middle road. they went to Texas (Red Star/Lone Star) and hired out to the South Texas Grange as part of there security force but they still work for Milgov on select missions as a Spec Ops team.
Regards.
Lloyd D.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega / Returning troops
Posted by: Rainbow Six
Date: 07/31/2002 17:11
OK, like Cav Scout I obviously have too much time on my hands, for I’ve been bouncing thoughts around on this one all day. Before I start, apologies if I’m rehashing anything, but this thread seems to have run over several threads, so I may have missed something...
OK, let’s take a figure of approx 40K troops returning from Europe (that’s a back of envelope calculation based on the organised units listed in Going Home +/- a few stragglers).
First point is how many of these guys want to stay in service? Who knows? On the plus point, they have food, water, plus relative safety in numbers. On the negative side the’re still in the Green machine, which they may not particularly wan to be.
So....what does a GI from Seattle, WA do? Risk a multi thousand mile trek across the USA with a few buddies or stay with the crowd? Reference has already been made that these guys are survivors. I think survivors choose the latter.
(You could use that logic of course, to state that the closer a GI lived to the disembarkation point the more likliehood he’ll take to the hills first chance he gets. I’ll buy that.)
Re: the disembarkation point - I go with Savannah, GA. Fits in perfectly with some work I did for my campaign a while back which has the Savannah / Paris Island area occupied by the USMC units who were in training on Thanksgiving Day ’97. So the fleet lands there - the Marines, being Marines are loyal to MilGov, of course.
I think 75% is a fair number to say will remain in service - I realise this is pure assumption on my part, and everyone is going to have thier own opinion on this.
So, spend the winter reconstituing, merging the smaller units, requiiping as best as they can, and come the Spring you have two fair sized Corps, - more back of envelope calculations give me somewhere in the region of nine Divisions, average strength 3000 - mostly leg infantry (the Marines have a couple of M60’s, LA25’s and AAVP’s). And there was a CH47 with TF34.
Now, what was the first thing it occurred to me to do (as a non American and non military)? Occupy Forts Benning and Stewart, currently occupied by a CivGov loyal unit (108th). I’m thinking to myself that if the 108th knew that the Big Red One is on its way to boot them off their turf, they might just decide to join MilGov, adding another Division. From there, control of Georgia should be guarenteed. Florida would be next. After that, start moving North and West. Link up with the forces in Texas - and if the 194th could be freed from their current role to move to Texas with their tanks....adios, Mexico.....
BTW, I love the idea of Divison Cuba bartering for safe passage out of the US in exchange for their heavy gear - sounds perfectly feasible to me.
(All of the above might make no sense to anyone with military experince, so feel free to say....)
Sorry if this has gone on a bit...just more random thoughts....
(There's still plenty more, the lot posted now is about half of the archive. I'll leave off posting more just yet to allow this lot to be digested - Cheers, Kevin)
*****************
ReHerakhte
Continuation...
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega / Returning troops
Posted by: Cav Scout
Date: 07/31/2002 18:40
>>So, spend the winter reconstituing, merging the smaller units, requiiping as best as they can, and come the Spring you have two fair sized Corps, - more back of envelope calculations give me somewhere in the region of nine Divisions, average strength 3000 - mostly leg infantry (the Marines have a couple of M60’s, LA25’s and AAVP’s). And there was a CH47 with TF34.<<
If reorganizing, I think they might opt to call a brigade a brigade and whatnot, but the numbers sound about right.
For those who do not wish to remain in active service, perhaps MilGov offers them something to the effect of 40 acres and a mule, plus a commission in the local militia. "Military colonies" made up of combat veterans turned farmers and craftsmen could help hold down the countryside, even in places where New America sympathizers are active.
>>Now, what was the first thing it occurred to me to do (as a non American and non military)? Occupy Forts Benning and Stewart, currently occupied by a CivGov loyal unit (108th).<<
In the south-east USA, I’d add Anniston Army Depot to the prize list, if it hasn’t been completely looted by 2000 (and most of its "prize" content would be things like spare parts for tracked vehicles, refurbishable AFV hulls, heavy weapons ammunition, etc.).
Benning being in the hands of CivGov has always struck me as questionable -- on Thanksgiving Day ’97 it would have been host to over a brigade of regular army training units, plus whatever the 108th had there (if anything -- the only post I know they had a mobilization role at is Jackson). That brigade or so would include such presumably staunchly pro-MilGov types as the Airborne School cadre and 4th Battalion of the Ranger Training Brigade, and I have a hard time imagining them joining up with the 108th/CivGov.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Webstral
Date: 08/01/2002 02:20
The ratio of farmers to non-farmers in Twilight: 2000 is, I think, THE question. I have been trying to work this out for Sonora Oasis. Someone (I don’t remember who) mentioned that in medieval society, 80-90% of the population worked in agriculture. In some regions of the US, this figure will apply. The successful cantonments will be the ones ways to drive this number down.
There will be lots of variables—more than I can name in the few minutes I want to take before going to bed. Included, however, will be how much the local populace knows about farming, what the health of the farmers is like, what the nutritional balance of the local diet is like, whether what people are trying to grow is suited to the locale, and in the American West whether there is enough water. The water issue is all-important in the American Southwest. I think the Southwest suffers a disproportionate share of the depopulation in 1998. Having the Mexicans roll through doesn’t help, though hopefully they’re not stupid enough to burn the crops in the field and wreck the irrigation system.
The target I’m shooting for is having the Sonora Oasis work its farming and food-gathering population down to 40%. This frees the other sixty percent for industry and other economics, construction, administration, and soldiering.
Webstral
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Ben
Date: 08/01/2002 04:05
I was thinking about the number of people needed to feed themselves.
A population of 500,000. Remember not all would be able bodied workers. As a rough guide say 8% would be aged 65+ and 15% aged 0-14. These numbers are lower than they would be (the 65+ pop would be about 12-13% and the 0-14 pop about 20-21%). Due to the conditions disease, weather, social conditions etc the young and old would suffer the most.
So of the half million population.
40000 would be 65+
150,000 0-14 years
310,000 14-65 years
As to feeding themselves. They have a workforce of 310,000 people. Of which at least 80% would be involved in labour intensive farming (I rate at 80% given better farming techniques than a medieval society and use of machinery to a limited extent. Still it would not be an easy task based on land quality, water, suitable crops etc).
So 248,000 thousand people work on the land.
Leaving 62,000 other people for other area’s. Such as services (store owners, barbers, doctors, mechanics). These would also include coal miners,
road workers or anyone else not directly involved in food production.
As to a full time military force. People devoted to nothing else other than fighting or law enforcement. As a rough guide say 5% (much higher than the normal ratio of about 1%) of the 62,000. Some 3100 people. Which might not sound very high but then Luxemburg Pop 400,000 has a full time military of only 800 (but then does not have marauders running around or any real external threats).
Of course a milita would be available. Say half of the able bodied population (including women of course). Some 155,000 people for defense.
Full time military forces are expensive and are only viable so long as a people make a surplus or use machines to save on labour.
Feeding ones self and family is a full time occupation. As already stated only about 2% of the current population are food producers. In Australia we have more hairdressers than coal miners (or in the US more lawyers than farmers?).
Ben
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Nick Butta
Date: 08/01/2002 04:41
I have a question about the widely quoted 80-90% figure.
Did this many people work in agriculture because a. it was the only way they could survive.
or
b. it was the only work available.
If people are forced to work in agriculture because they are all needed to feed themselves fine - the 80-90% figure applies to out scenario.
If it is the only work available then there is an entirely different situation. The number of people who would have been doing different things in the middle ages might have been > 80-90% if they had had alternatives.
Considering this I think that rather than looking at the middle ages we should consider the early-mid industrial revolution i.e. 1850-1900. This would incorporate advances in technique but not petroleum requiring machinery etc.
Webstral is right in saying that the surplus labor available will be the factor that dictates the success of a settlement. (along with resource available, skill set and organisation).
So the next question is: given 100,00 workers what do you do with them??
My emphasis would probably be on the process of developing increasingly advanced industry plus production of trade goods for trading with other regions. Basic industry must include things like materials/textiles (for clothing), coal, roads repair(for transportation), basic metals, wood (furniture etc), building supplies. Thats about the only low tech industry I can think of right now. Oh, and ammunition and mortars.
If you can produce items valuable enough to ship to north africa, aruba (mentioned in GttSM) or Iran - you can have oil- which is good - but I can’t think of what such things might be.
BTW - whoever had the idea of 40 acres and a mule for veterans had a good one (if you can feed a family on 40 acres ??).
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Cav Scout
Date: 08/01/2002 06:02
>>I have a question about the widely quoted 80-90% figure.
Did this many people work in agriculture because a. it was the only way they could survive.
or
b. it was the only work available.<<
I think it was generally the former, with societies having a limited ability to generate a food surplus (and when technology improved things, population boomed). OTOH, that was with all parts of the equation (i.e. technology, economic models, social organization, etc.) being archaic by our standards.
I suspect that a group of T2K survivors with a decent brain trust would be able to do better with the same resources (barring marauders, drought, blight, etc etc).
As you noted, a more recent model for agricultural productivity may be a better one, at least for well organized groups like MilGov in Colorado and CivGov’s pre-Drought Nebraska enclave (I agree with whoever didn’t like the whole Drought storyline, FWIW).
>>BTW - whoever had the idea of 40 acres and a mule for veterans had a good one (if you can feed a family on 40 acres ??).<<
From that website I posted the URL for a couple days ago, they claimed the ideal family farm size during the Middle Ages in England was 24-30 acres. A family of four could survive on as little as five acres, though this left very little margin for bad weather or other problems (you can go even smaller, land-wise, once the potato gets into circulation).
A forty acre farm, coupled with 19th century technology, draft animals (or surviving machinery), and a working knowledge of agriculture should produce a comfortable living for several people (by T2K standards) with a surplus. The trick is getting all of the above assembled, and keeping the less fortunate from killing them for what they have.
Some additional numbers:
500 liters of grain needed to feed one adult for one year ("at a very basic level")
One acre of wheat (medieval technology). You plant 72 liters of seed, get 250-300 liters of grain. Barley was 144 liters in, 700-720 liters of yield. Oats 108 liters in, 360-400 liters out. Peas were 108 liters in, 300-340 liters out.
(The rough average is four liters of food generated per liter of seed. During the 18th century technology improved the ratio from 4:1 to 10:1. In the 20th century it has increased to 20:1.)
T2K survivors would have access to various crops unknown or in limited use in medieval Europe which in and of themselves alter the equation (i.e. corn, potatoes, sweet potatoes, rice, peanuts, not to mention dietary protein from fish farming, etc etc.). Unfortunately, I haven’t found "liter in, liter out" numbers for other crops yet.
________________________________________
Subject: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 12:01
Very good. I have used "Principles of Field Crop Production" 1949 copyright by Martin and Leonard (Macmillan) as my references. Many of the figures given in the book are much more in line with what can be expected as production levels on the average after the mushrooms.
Depending on the area, there will, could, be persons who know how to farm ’the old way’. This way has been ’trained’ out of todays farmers however. Today they are high input operations, most based on petrochemicals.. fuel, fertilizer, pesticides.. all require oil in one form or another. The other critical factor often overlooked is not the availability of seed, but the type of seed. Hybred seed gives the high yields but only for one year, and only if they are fertilized profusely and the weeds, etc are controlled, ususally with chemicals.
First year after the attack, hybred seed will probably be available, as well as some fertilizers, and chemical pesticides, but fuels are limited also, so smaller operations.. probablility of successful crop IMO fair, but probably shortfalls.. and distribution problems..
also the fallout problems!! MOST of the breadbasket lies in the fallout zones of the Dakota Deadlands (which are really North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, eastern Wyoming, Southwestern Nebraska). The Omaha strike will effect Iowa and Illinois Im sure and Whitman strikes will cause havoc in the south central..
Result is starvation.. NOW the cux of what we started talking about.. seed. The hybred seed cannot be saved from the exisitng plant to be used the next year.. atleast not very sucessfully.. so any yeilds the next year are less.. alot less in most cases..
I forsee CORN as being a luxury item in the future, NOT a staple, unless you get some open pollinated seed.. Yes there are some available, it’s just not popular, and there fore scarce (worth more than it’s weight in gold!! IMO)
Most of the vegetables (tomatoes, peppers, etc..) fall into the same catagory.. most are hybreds.
Other grains (wheat, oat, barley) would fare better. They require less inputs, and fare better in dryer conditions.
Yields: crop yields (pounds per acre)
years of data 1937-46
CORN 1638# +
WHEAT 966#
"only Louisiana, Florida, and five of the six New england states are not counted amoung wheat-producing states"
RYE 580#
BARLEY 1152#
OAT 1036#
RICE 2800# *
SOYBEANS 1120# +
COWPEAS 320#
FIELD BEANS 900#
PEANUTS 700# +
FIELD PEA 1200#
POTATO 8200# **
SWEET POTATO 5280# **
+ ARE USUSALLY HYBRED SEEDS.
* Rice is a labor intensive operation, not really conducive to small plot operations in the US. It was a ’slave’ operated crop prior to mechanization, as was cotton.
** Potato and sweet potato require cuttings or tubers to continue propagation, therefore they might be scarce across the country with isolated areas of good production found.. where seed is available it would be expensive.
(to be continued)
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega/food production (part 2)
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 12:31
Production of the food needed to support a family of four is NOT very much land. IF you follow the guidelines of the ’basic four’ the LDS use as the base storage for preparedness, 360# of grains(wheat), 60# dried milk, 60# sugar, 5 # salt.
MOST of the caloric intake is sugar and starch (duhh).
Can a family raise this.. (well not the salt but..)
one acre wheat yeilded ca 960 # minus seed requirement of 90# per acre, nets 870 pounds of feed. TWO acres gives surplus for another mouth plus a bit (say a few chickens). Or you bnarter for some dairy from the neighbor with the cow that produces more than they need.
vegetable production from my sources varies greatly with type of system used, and crops produced, with root crops yeilding much more than others, but if we look at the field bean/field pea and substitute it for dairy product you get 900 pounds of beans per acre minus seed stock requirement of 100 pounds netting 800 pounds per acre. Surplus for the family on 1/2 acre of beans is 160 pounds, enough for almost three mouths.
Just the two basics (you dont need the sugar) on two acres has supplied a family of four, and surplus for 1-3 more people. Labor intensive? Not as bad as you think with the type of crop were talking about.. wheat is a pretty competatvie crop, and simple irrigation of one-two acres will greatly improve the yields. banded for walk room, you hand weed the fields, yielding inmost cases edible greens for the table. Guarenteed success.. NO.. with minimal help from outside.. yes..
There are numerous variables not discussed... but that would be up to the HOG... ever see what hail does to a crop ready to harvest? I have and it’s a gut wrenching site.. I can only imagine how it would be if your life directly depended on the crop. Drought.. well you might still be lucky and get your seed back and a bit more. Probably not enough on two acres to make it through the winter though.
Questions on agricultural production I will try to answer..... it’s my background and what I got my degree in, but I have always been interested in the ’old way’, so have researched it a bit, just dont have my source books at hand <sigh>
(A lengthy section on uses for corn follows, the conjecture being that corn is incredibly useful so probably would form an important part of agriculture but not as food except as a luxury item - Cheers, Kevin)
*****************
ReHerakhte
________________________________________
Subject: Uses for Corn part
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 13:02
"I forsee CORN as being a luxury item in the future, NOT a staple, unless you get some open pollinated seed.. Yes there are some available, it’s just not popular, and there fore scarce (worth more than it’s weight in gold!! IMO)"
Corn as a luxury item? I don’t think so. Corn has far more utility than wheat. Here’s a few uses outside of food.
http://agebb.missouri.edu/mass/indepth/corn/uses.htm
Here’s a web site that lists the many products that corn is used for.
CORN USES
Primary products
• Starches
• Syrups
• Dextrose
Co-Products
• Solubles
• Gluten and Hulls
• Germ
Source:
"1998 The World of Corn." National Corn Growers Association. St. Louis,
Missouri. 24 May 1999.
Starches
CORNSTARCH:
Industrial Uses
• Abrasive paper and cloth
• Adhesives (glues, gums, etc.)
• Batteries
• Binder or binding agents
• Board (corrugating, cardboard, etc.)
• Briquettes
• Ceramics (as clay binder)
• Cleaners, detergents
• Coatings on wood, metal and paper
• Color carrier (in paper and textiles)
• Cork Products
• Crayon and chalk (as a binder)
• Dressing, surgical
• Dyes
• Fireworks
• Insecticide powders
• Insulating materials (glass, wool, rock)
• Lubricating agents
• Oilcloth
• Oil-well drilling
• Ore refining
• Paints (cleaning compounds, cold water and latex paints, poster lacquers)
• Paper and paper products
• Plastics (molded)
• Plywood
• Tires, rubber
Food, Drug or Cosmetic Uses
• Antibiotics
• Aspirin
• Baby Foods
• Bakery products (bread, rolls, cakes, pies, crackers and cookies)
• Baking powder
• Beverages, brewed (beer, ale, etc.)
• Chewing gum
• Chocolate drink
• Confectionery
• Cosmetics
• Desserts (puddings, custards, etc.)
• Drugs and pharmaceuticals
• Flours, prepared
• Food and drug coatings
• Gravies and sauces
• Meat products
• Mixes, prepared (pancake, waffle, cake, candy)
• Mustard, prepared
• Pie filling
• Precooked frozen pizzas
• Salad dressing
• Soaps and cleaners
• Soups
• Sugar, powdered
• Vegetables, canned
DEXTRINS:
Industrial Uses
• Bookbinding
• Briquettes
• Candles
• Cord polishing
• Core binder (castings, molds, etc.)
• Cork products
• Dyes (dry, cake, etc.)
• Envelopes
• Fireworks
• Inks, printing
• Insulation, fiberglass
• Labels
• Leather
• Linoleum
• Magazines
• Matches (on head and side of box)
• Ore separation
• Paints (cold-water, poster, etc.)
• Sandpaper
• Shoes (counter pastes, polish, etc.)
• Silvering compounds
• Soaps
• Straws (drinking)
• Textiles, sizing, finishing and printing
• Twine (cord, string, etc.)
• Wallboard and wallpaper
• Window shades and shade cloth
Syrups
CORN SYRUP:
Industrial Uses
• Chemicals
• Dyes and inks
• Explosives
• Leather tanning (chrome process)
• Metal plating
• Paper, glassine and parchment
• Plasticizer
• Polish, shoe
• Rayon (viscose process)
• Theatrical makeup
• Tobacco and tobacco products
Food, Drug Uses; Liquid or Dried Form
• Baby Foods
• Bakery products
• Beverages, brewed and carbonated
• Breakfast foods
• Catsup, chili sauce, tomato sauce
• Cereals, prepared
• Cheese spreads and foods
• Chewing gum
• Chocolate products
• Coffee whiteners
• Condensed milk, sweetened
• Confectionery
• Cordials and liqueurs
• Desserts
• Eggs, frozen or dried
• Extracts and flavors
• Frostings and icings
• Fruit butters and juices
• Fruits (canned, candied, fillings, frozen)
• Ice cream, water ices and sherbets
• Jams, jellies, marmalades and preserves
• Licorice
• Malted products
• Marshmallows and related products
• Medicinal preparations (drugs, pharmaceuticals)
• Peanut butter
• Pickles and pickle products
• Salad dressing
• Sauces (seasoning, specialty, etc.)
• Seafood, frozen
• Soups, dehydrated
• Syrups (table, chocolate, cocoa, fruit, medicinal, soda fountain,
cordials, etc.)
HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP:
Food Uses
• Canned fruits and juices
• Condiments, jams, jellies and preserves
• Frozen desserts
• Soft drinks
• Wine
• Yeast
MALTODEXTRINS:
Food Uses
• Bakery mixes
• Beverage powders
• Condiments
• Dehydrated foods
• Dry soup mixes
• Gum confections
• Icings and glazes
• Instant teas
• Instant breakfast foods
• Low calorie sweeteners
• Marshmallows
• Nougats
• Pan coatings
• Sauce and gravy mixes
• Snack foods
Dextrose
DEXTROSE:
Industrial Uses
• Acids, commercial (lactic, acetic, gluconic, etc.)
• Adhesives
• Amino acids
• Chemicals (calcium, lactate, etc.)
• Citric
• Dyes
• Electroplating and galvanizing
• Enzymes
• Lactic acid polymers
• Leather tanning
• Lysine
• Mannitol
• Sizing materials
• Sorbitol
• Threonime
• Tryptophan
Food, Drug Uses
• Antibiotics
• Baby foods
• Berries, canned and frozen
• Caramel color
• Cheese foods and spread
• Citric acid
• Citrus juices
• Coloring, pure food mix
• Condensed milk
• Confectionery
• Cordials, liqueurs and brandy
• Cream, frozen
• Dairy products
• Desserts
• Dietetic preparations
• Distillation products
• Doughnuts (cake, yeast)
• Drugs (fermentation process)
• Eggs, frozen or dried
• Fish, pickled
• Flavoring extracts
• Food acids (citric, etc.)
• Fruit juices
• Fruits and vegetables (canned)
• Fruits (candied, glace, frozen)
• Gelatin desserts
• Ice cream, water ices, sherbets
• Infant and invalid feeding
• Jams, jellies, marmalades and preserves
• Meat products (bacon, bologna, hams, sausage, frankfurters, mincemeat)
• Medicinal preparations and intravenous (injections, pills, tablets,
drugs, etc.)
• Peanut butter
• Peas, canned
• Pectin, fruit
• Pickles and pickle products
• Powders (pudding, summer drinks)
• Sauces (catsup, tomato, etc.)
• Seasoning mixes, dry
• Sorbitol (in candies, toothpaste, etc.)
• Soups, dehydrated
• Spices and mustard preparations
• Vinegar
• Wine
• Xanthan gums
HYDROL:
Corn-Sugar Molasses
• Leather tanning
• Livestock feed
• Organic acids
• Organic solvents
• Tobacco
ETHANOL:
• Alcoholic beverages
• Industrial alcohol
• Octane enhancer
• Oxygenate in motor fuels
PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS:
• Mouthwash
• Toothpaste
Solubles
STEEPWATER:
• Antibiotics
• Chemicals
• Pharmaceuticals
• Yeast
Gluten and Hulls
STEEPWATER for Feed, Gluten Feed and Meal, Oil Meal:
• Amino acids
• Corn germ meal
• Corn gluten feed and meal
• Corn sugar (crude and refined)
• Fur cleaner
• Hydrol
• Zein and other protein products
Germ
CORN OIL:
• Carriers for vitamins and other medicinal preparations in capsule form
• Cooking oil
• Margarine
• Mayonnaise
• Potato chips
• Rust preventative
• Soap
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 13:24
Funny, I’ve lived in every part of Nebraska and we all thought the best growing soil was in eastern Nebraska, Western Iowa, Southeastern South Dakota and Northeastern Kansas.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Uses for Corn part
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 13:29
I may have misused the term luxury.. yes CORN has more utility, but unless you have an open pollinated variety, you will not have corn for long, therefor it becomes a scarce commodity.. humm maybe that would have been a better choice of word..
Im not here ot flame, but to exchange ideas
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 13:34
as well they are, but Illinois will argue with you.. but not me I was not from corn country (NODAK) I think what I refered to was the fallout zones.. prevailing winds will contaminate or have the potential to contaminate a vast section of the select cropland of the region, with winds being westerly, and northwesterly..
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Uses for Corn part
Posted by: Dawg
Date: 08/01/2002 13:36
Actually, the highest yield soil in the world is in Champaign county, Illinois at least according to one of my professors (it was a physics class on energy). IIRC correctly, the average acre of land in the world can produce 20 bushels of corn while in Champaign county with modern farming techniques they could produce 200 bushels an acre. (Of course, I could be slightly off on the figures, it was many years ago) And I have no idea what the conversion from imperial bushels to metric liters is.
And correct me if I am wrong, but about 95% of corn is grown to feed cattle and pigs which are in turn used for food, right? Not necessarily the most efficient method from an energy use standpoint if my memory serves. One of my friends always thought all that corn in the fields was the stuff you see in the grocery store over July the 4th weekend
Dawg
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Uses for Corn part
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 13:40
Dawg,
I meant in my particular area (Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, Kansas). Didn’t mean the whole US.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 13:43
Maybe I’m wrong here, but I thought only Minot, Grand Forks were hit in the Dakotas.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 13:56
I don’t know much about the radiological factors I’ll leave that to other experts. You are leaving out a lot of other factors to consider. Supply and demand for one. If corn would be as rare you think it is, more people will try to grow because it will be worth more. Yes, corn yields will be down but you’ve seem to forget that so is the population that the corn crop has to feed. You don’t have to feed 250 million with, just a few million people in selected areas. Also I have to believe there are more seeds lying around than just for one growing season.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: Cav Scout
Date: 08/01/2002 14:47
>>Supply and demand for one. If corn would be as rare you think it is, more people will try to grow because it will be worth more.<<
Doesn’t that premise sort of depend on the notion of a functioning market economy driving production? I don’t know if this would hold up in most parts of the T2K world, where you have a barter economy, very small surpluses of food and other production (in my opinion), and trade is sporadic, potentially dangerous, and dependent on fuel or animal power that could otherwise be used on a myriad of equally vital tasks.
>>Also I have to believe there are more seeds lying around than just for one growing season.<<
I think the problem here is that outside the areas still under CivGov or MilGov control (and the occasionally well organized independent militia or city state), the die-off would, by definition, be chaotic and characterized by people making less than prudent and rational decisions concerning the preservation of edible materials like seeds. Those people who might be best able to utilize open-pollinating corn (or other seed grain, etc.) are going to be a minority among the rest of us in such a scenario who are hungry and whose knowledge of agriculture isn’t much more than some dim memories of how the Indians saved the Pilgrims from starving by planting corn with fish-head fertillizer. Some places you might get ready made labor married up to the knowledge to keep people alive, but in many places you get confrontation between small numbers of local farmers or other people with subsistence skills versus the unwashed hordes of the service industry with no ability to feed themselves except via theft and mob violence (i.e. Allegheny Uprising, which describes the former situation degenerating into the latter as the government keeps dumping people on the local rural economy).
By 2000 the "human locust" phenomenon has probably played itself out most places (+/- the Drought), but I’ve always assumed some pretty significant damage was done to both availability of resources as well as the agricultural brain trust before things levelled out (hence Howling Wilderness’ notation that in many areas food production is back to a medieval level).
Just my opinions, in any case.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production (part 2)
Posted by: Webstral
Date: 08/01/2002 15:08
Graebarde,
Great stuff! You may just be the man I’ve been looking for. I’ve done some research on semi-arid agriculture, but I have no real first-hand experience. I may just take you up on your offer in the near future.
Webstral
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: Brian S.
Date: 08/01/2002 15:15
"I think the problem here is that outside the areas still under CivGov or MilGov control"
I thought we were talking about the Civgov/Milgov controlled areas.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 22:23
by canon I think your right, but do you really beleive Ivan would let 300+ missles lie in the silos?
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega/food production
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/01/2002 22:29
I agree with you there... the problem is going to be distribution. The seed needs to get to the farmer. Most I know usually wait till spring to get their hybreds from the suppler. They ususally are shipped from the seed companies around the first of the year IIRC. Now to find a ’cache’ of seed would be a god send for sure. A thing to remember is the seed corn will probably not be edible as they treat the seed with insecticide and fungicides, so if the seed is colored.. beware.. it will germinate though if it has not been damaged by heat over a long period. Of course a reduced yield is better than no yield.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/02/2002 19:09
This might be an ’dumb’ question, but where does Operation Omega come from? Is it canon? If so which module? plz without me looking through them all tell me.
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: Cav Scout
Date: 08/02/2002 19:11
Going Home
________________________________________
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Operation Omega
Posted by: graebarde
Date: 08/03/2002 00:03
TY
________________________________________
END
(This is the end of the main thread, the second thread deals with rural folk particularly farmers - Cheers, Kevin)