On Sat, 1 Aug 1998 10:22:54 -0400, Ilya <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Amadeus Schmidt wrote:
>> Hello Ilya,
>> But even with two harvests, grain yield would not be better than
>> the mentioned roots, isn't it?
>> cheers
>Uhmm... I used to live in Russia, hardly a 'southern part'. I was
>also specifically NOT talking about fruit but about grains. My point
>was that you undercounted the yields from grains because you factored
>in only a single harvest, which is true for fruit but not grains.
>Your comparison for different crops should have been on a yearly
>basis.
>
>I know that currently farming in Russia is hardly organic. However,
>they used to have 2 crops/year there years ago (long before
>communists) and as far as I know all farming back then would
>qualify as organic.
>
>Ilya
We could look up it in a book about neolithicum.
I think neolithic harvests were _much_ lower than even todays organic
harvests. But still 1200-fold in terms of land use.
90 mesolithic hunters/gatherers need 30*30 kilometers to live on.
90 neolithic immigrants needed about 1/1000th of the
space of this area to move in and live upon.

Meanwhile i read much about the opioid in grains issue.
For example in the "vegan-straight-edge" site mentioned by Todd.
That would provide one reason to use grains instead of roots.
Hmmm
I never noticed any kind of opioid-like effect of grains though.
What could it be like?
Any suggestions?

regards
Amadeus