Re: Magic to aid farming in space

> Michael Sandy wrote:
>
> Someone claimed that it would take 40,000 farmers to feed a city
> of 10,000.
> I would dispute that.

And I'd disagree.  But that's what we're here for. :)

>
> First, the division between farmers and craftsmen isn't always
> that strict.
> Farmers produce a lot of crafts, clothing, wood products etc...  It
> may take 40,000 involved in some form of agriculture to supply a city
> of 10,000 craftspeople, but that includes _everything_ that comes out
> of the ground.

And in space, that division is only likely to be more explicit, not less.
Cargo space is at a premium, after all, so why waste it by shipping ten tons
of raw wool from the sheepfarming colony on Nevermind IV when the herders
can do the weaving themselves and ship five tons of finished wool clothes?
The herders are probably better equipped to dispose of the trash products
involved in woolens manufacture, to boot.

(I kinda have to wonder at what the *space* looks like for a few hundred
yards outside an asteroid colony's air envelope, given how medieval and
Renaissance cities disposed of their waste.  Bral probably has a
substantially-sized 'trashteroid' hovering out at about a quarter-mile's
distance.  What would happen if neogi saboteurs or rabid Xenos tried hauling
a large chunk of the stuff back towards the city, and threatened to shove it
into the air envelope?...)

>
> And second, it assumes that there is no magic being used on an
> industrial scale,
> and that farm practices are medieval instead of Renaissance, like
> the rest of
> Spelljammer's technology.

Well, IIRC Renaissance farm work wasn't that much different from medieval
farming practices.  It was the Industrial Revolution where crop farming
really began to become efficient - which was what provided the urban
manpower for all those factories in the first place.  Say what you will
about the medieval period, but it was relatively stable for a long time in
terms of technology and culture - which IMHO is one reason why it's so
popular for fantasy.  Setting an unchanging fantasy world in a period of
Earth history which didn't noticeably change itself for 700-800 years is
fairly easy; set an unchanging fantasy world at a later date, and the
questions about why the fantasy world didn't start advancing at the same
speed as our own become much more frequent.

(If I were pressed, I'd probably suggest that Spelljammer tech and culture
is a fusion of established groundling culture with the technological
advancements of an earlier spacefaring culture which *did* have Renaissance,
and post-Renaissance, technology - but then went and blew itself out of
existence.  Explains why spacefarers have such wonders as gunpowder, simple
printing presses, and established multisphere trading costers, but no real
interest or ability in progressing further.  Also explains where the farmers
who became unemployed when Renaissance/industrial boom technology appeared
went to - they started an industrial revolution on their home planet, went
even further with it, and are now dead.  Sad, but true.)

>
> Consider skeletons working the harvest.  Cheap labor, relatively
> simple job, untiring,
> and best of all, you don't need to feed them.

You do, however, need to feed the wizards and the evil clerics controlling
them.  If we go by the 3E players handbook, you either have to be a
5th-level cleric or a 9th-level wizard to animate skeletons, and you can
only control 2 HD per caster level of skeletons raised.  (Clerics able to
command undead can increase this to 3 HD per caster level, but that's about
as far as it goes.)  Either way you look at it, that's a lot of spellcasters
needed in a very small space - some of which may not be the best neighbors.
Spacegoing outposts of the Red Wizards might do this, but I can't see anyone
else pulling it off.

>
> Various crop affecting spells will reduce the amount of time to get a
> harvest, others
> can insure against insects to ensure the harvest is successful.
> Another thing to
> consider is that agricultural asteroids might have very few natural
> pests.  And if
> they are smart, they will be very restrictive of ships landing
> for that reason.
>
> And while I do _not_ want to be around Gnome-built harvester
> equipment, various
> simple aids to harvesting and plowing should be available,
> considering the amount
> of steel that is available.

I'd agree that magic and tech can probably help spacefaring colonies out
quite a bit.  It's in fact probably the only thing that makes food
production possible at all.  Consider that your average asteroid has very
little in arable soil or fertilizing nutrients, and probably even less in
free moisture.  In most spheres, the asteroid will also be farther away from
the sun and get less sunlight as well.  I'd expect magic to be needed just
to counteract these disadvantages, except in the case of the oldest and most
stable space colonies.  (Bral, for instance, probably has enough
carbon-based topsoil and free water to handle crop growth on its own...
though even there it may be tough to stay stable.  Remember, there's a
notable lack of large animals to provide manure.  And using human waste, so
close to an urban area, is a distinctly bad idea.)

And on an off-note, just how many distant asteroids do we expect to have
weather and seasons approaching terrestrial norms?  Imagine farming on a
world where summer is seven months long and it never rains...

>
> Grain farming allows a _lot_ of food to be grown in a small area.
>  It allowed
> farming regions to support large populations that displaced
> nomadic herding
> cultures.  But those nomadic herding cultures could afford a much higher
> warrior/population ratio because they needed fewer food suppliers.
>
> If there are a lot of food supplying asteroids available, with a
> lot of surface
> area, herding may be more successful because it requires less manpower
> and fewer structures to have to defend.

I think that "surface area" is going to be a key point here.  For
18th-century America (probably a fairly good approximation of
Spelljammer-style farming requirements), one family was usually able to
homestead on 640 acres of land - one square mile.  That's a rural population
density, for grain farming backed by a fair amount of knowledge and
technology, of 5 to 6 people per square mile, at a time when colonial
America was still easily 75% rural.

Or IOW, to support an urban population of 10,000, you need 6,000 square
miles of land devoted to grain farming on the colonial American model.
That's the entire surface area of a spherical asteroid 40 miles across - not
many of which exist in *our* asteroid belt.  And you'd like to devote how
many of these to low-efficiency herding?  With the resulting need to monitor
the health of the grasses those animals are eating, the water they're
drinking, and the air they're breathing?  A grain crop at least isn't
competing for air with the human that's husbanding it! :)


Overall, I'd say that large-scale food production in space is tough enough
as to be Not Worth It.  Groundlings do it much easier than spacers; let them
grow the food, and pay them in asteroid iron and Arcane magical gewgaws. ;)
Every large spacefaring settlement is probably going to have some space set
over to food production in the event of an emergency, but being
self-sufficient is a dream that only the most paranoid will go for.

IMHO, of course. :D

>
> Michael Sandy
>

"The best lack all conviction,
 While the worst are full of passionate intensity."
                        - W.B. Yeats, "The Second Coming"
Rodger Burns
<libramus@???.org>