Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: State Farm Production Ranking  (Read 2744 times)

Rearden

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
  • We're supposed to be activists, remember?
    • Free State Project
State Farm Production Ranking
« on: July 23, 2003, 10:57:55 am »

Data from 2001

Source:  www.ers.usda.gov/data/farmincome/50state/50stmenu.htm

State         Production Value Per Acre                National Rank

DE                     $1646                                        1
VT                     $455                                          14
ME                     $427                                         15

NH                    $422                                          16
ID                      $346                                          27
SD                      $98                                           44
ND                     $84                                            45

AK                      $62                                            47
MT                     $35                                            49
WY                     $31                                           50

Logged
Government can do only one thing: It can break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, "See?  If not for the government you couldn't walk."

Rearden

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
  • We're supposed to be activists, remember?
    • Free State Project
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2003, 02:32:43 pm »

I wonder what they're growing in Delaware!


Very rich soil + close proximity to major Baltimore/DC/Philadelphia markets = high value
Logged
Government can do only one thing: It can break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, "See?  If not for the government you couldn't walk."

Kelton Baker

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Freedom is Free, it's tyranny that costs us dearly
    • Kelton Baker
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2003, 03:01:55 pm »

Idaho's #5 crop             $225,103,000  
Maine's #1 crop             $129,352,000
Alaska's unk. crop            $76,700,000
Montana's #4 crop            $58,942,000
Vermont's #2 crop             $44,145,000
Delaware's #3 crop          $18,926,000
New Hampshire's #2 crop  $9,825,000
South Dakota's #9 crop      $9,606,000
North Dakota's (>10) crop  $5,609,520
Wyoming's #8 crop            $1,964,000

Source:  The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
31
« Last Edit: July 29, 2003, 10:13:57 am by exitus... »
Logged
Give me some men who are stout-hearted men Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men And I'll soon give you ten thousand more...--O. Hammerstein

Kelton Baker

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Freedom is Free, it's tyranny that costs us dearly
    • Kelton Baker
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2003, 10:16:42 am »


FARM PRODUCTS
The following is an attempt at some estimate of self-sufficiency in farm products. Though there are many ways that the following does not directly measure this, it is a measure of how the value of farm products per person in each state. I include total farm acreage and average farm size. Note also the productivity in dollars per acre and the very high values from Delaware versus very low values in Montana. Note also for those wanting BIG FARMS -- see the Average Acres per Farm.
Nevertheless, in a general way, the topmost states could be the most “self-sufficient”.
$/personState1990 populationFarm Products $Value 19871987 Total Farm AcresFarm $/acreAcres/Farm
$3,907SD0,696,004$2,719,498,00044,157,503$0621,214
$3,425ND0,638,800$2,188,158,00040,336,869$0541,143
$2,254ID1,006,749$2,269,404,00013,931,875$1630,577
$1,936MT0,799,065$1,547,286,00060,203,993$0262,451
$1,492WY0,453,588$0,676,721,00033,595,135$0203,650
$0,667VT0,562,758$0,375,537,00001,407,868$2670,240
$0,666DE0,666,168$0,443,575,00000,608,245$7290,205
$0,330ME1,227,928$0,405,484,00001,342,588$3020,214
$0,097NH1,109,252$0,107,102,00000,426,237$2510,169
$0,033AK0,550,043$0,017,972,00001,026,732$0181,789
Source:
http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/ccdb/state94.html
(newer data would be nice, yet I doubt the above general ranking would change much.)

69
Logged
Give me some men who are stout-hearted men Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men And I'll soon give you ten thousand more...--O. Hammerstein

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2003, 10:44:15 am »

Not that I'm a grammar nazi, but the explanation of how those figures were reached wasn't even comprehensible....  ???

JM
Logged
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard

A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today.



http://www.lightofalexandria.com

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5724
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2003, 10:52:59 am »

I once wrote a paper on land reform and agricultural productivity.  The differences between West and East actually have to do with intensity of cultivation and are analogous to differences among countries: for example, East Asia and Latin America.  Productivity per acre is highly negatively correlated with productivity per person.  If there's a lot of land per person, productivity per land unit will be low (cultivation is not intensive) and productivity per person will be high.  If there's little land per person, productivity per land unit will be high (cultivation is intensive: more fertilizer, more exacting care, more emphasis on high-yield and high-value products) and productivity per person will be low.

Of course, the fruitfulness of the land will have something to do with both per-acre and per-person yields, but that is actually not the main factor driving these figures.  For example, productivity per acre in Bangladesh is higher than almost anywhere else in the world, because whole families work tiny plots with extreme attention and care.  OTOH, productivity per person is higher in Argentinian Patagonia than almost anywhere else because of the immense ranges of land under cultivation by just a few people.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2003, 10:55:03 am by JasonPSorens »
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Rearden

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
  • We're supposed to be activists, remember?
    • Free State Project
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2003, 10:57:31 am »

I've got some interesting statistics on farming at home that I can put in this space later tonight.  Space is hereby reserved.
Logged
Government can do only one thing: It can break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, "See?  If not for the government you couldn't walk."

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2003, 12:57:17 pm »

I once had a fling with learning about "Permaculture" and trying to do something with it (unfortunately I have a black thumb  :P ). I recall that our seminar teacher made the point, or I read it somewhere, that in temperate zones the problem is that the land is actually too productive, leading to poverty among farmers. One of the associates of our teacher bought a small asphalt parking lot in the city, put together some raised beds on top of the asphalt, and made a fair amount of money selling organic specialty crops to restaurants.

I also remember reading somewhere, perhaps Julian Simon, that most starvation on earth is due to political factors, not environmental or over-population. Probably no surprise to this crowd.

Those are big farms in Alaska, but I wonder what grows there. Are people eating trees?   ;)
Logged

Kelton

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
  • el resplandor de las llamas de la libertad
Re:State Farm Production Ranking
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2003, 04:01:19 pm »

Idaho's #5 crop             $225,103,000  
Maine's #1 crop             $129,352,000
Alaska's unk. crop            $76,700,000
Montana's #4 crop            $58,942,000
Vermont's #2 crop             $44,145,000
Delaware's #3 crop          $18,926,000
New Hampshire's #2 crop  $9,825,000
South Dakota's #9 crop      $9,606,000
North Dakota's (>10) crop  $5,609,520
Wyoming's #8 crop            $1,964,000

Source:  The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws

Ah ha!

Now I know why Idaho has a rate of production of marijuana so much higher (nearly double that of the next state) than any other candidate state.

Long growing season/lots of sunshine/lots of federal land
See this article:
Busted!
Drug dealers are planting pot farms all over our national parks, and the Park Service is struggling to root them out. TIME goes on a raid



« Last Edit: July 30, 2003, 04:02:30 pm by exitus »
Logged
. . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue --The U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address
Pages: [1]   Go Up