Re: The Destruction of Farms by Encroaching Cities.

On Fri, 10 May 2024 19:30:28 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 5/10/2024 1:54 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/10/2024 12:26 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

Since I've never been further east than San Antonio, Texas, I don't
know how they combine living and farming in the eastern half of the US.
 
In California it is bandled attrociously with all of the land
including farm land gobbled up by developers, and government zoning
farms out of business. In Oregon and Washington the matter isn't yet
serious because the populations aren't large enough. But Idsho and
Montana are faced with the problem of cities beginning their
inevitable growth and some way to limit city grown an lean more to the
village model of Europe.
 
While California was still reasonably small riding from town to town
was certainly better than being in traffic with nearly every ride.
Niles used to be a village but now there is ONE field left between
Oakland and Niles. It is small but the farmer still grows corn each
year. Otherwise it is house to house except ehere industrial buildings
are placed.
 
This destruction of the enviroinment by the Democrats shows that
idiots have no foresight

 
In 1930 there were 986,771,016 farm acres total in USA, 51.8% of the
entire area.
 
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1930/agriculture-volume-2/03337983v2p1ch02.pdf
 
For 2023 it was merely 878,600,000 acres, something around 46.2% so
you're right about the trend (-5.5% over 90 years).
 
https://www.statista.com/statistics/196104/total-area-of-land-in-farms-in-the-us-since-2000/
 
That said, production per acre is exponentially higher (with less labor)
as noted here often, due to hybridization, better technical soil
analyses/rectification, better water management, mechanization rather
than draft animals and so on.  A crisis doesn't seem likely.
 
'Destruction of environment' is a subjective area. I would ask 'sez
who?'. One man decries home building while another eschews solar farms
and yet another bemoans 'wildlife areas' with zero output/revenue per acre.

 
And I'm curious what Tom would propose as a solution to what he
perceives as a problem. Perhaps more government regulations, to forbid
selling acreage to developers? Really?
 

Cities do seem to grow as populations grow, and in particular as suburbs
grow ie lower density areas and so on.
>
Roger Merriman

People have to have a place to live, and I can't blame them for not
wanting to live in apartments or tiny little houses within sight and
earshot of their neighbors.