PebHmong Discussion Forum
General Category => Hmong Culture & History => Topic started by: SVanTha on August 02, 2013, 06:23:51 PM
-
In china, hmong people built terraces for planting and pasture. In vietnam, hmong people built terraces for planting and pasture. But in laos, hmong people practiced slash n' burn; one of the least productive, most damaging and most arduous methods. Why? Did we forget terrace technology that quickly?
(http://i.imgur.com/X0Dl88R.jpg)
-
Its beautiful of how they grow rice with a series of terraces. I believe it can only be done that way if the landscape is descending along a lake or river.
-
The Hmong in Laos are also practicing rice paddy farming, a kind of low-land in-water rice-growing done on flat grounds.
I'm not sure why the Laotian-Hmong don't do terraces. Maybe it's because they are still able to migrate from place to place for arable lands rather than be limited to a sedentary lifestyle, relying on the same mountains over and over again. And perhaps it's also because they aren't doing large-scale farming like those in Vietnam and China, which would require segmenting out the hills to accommodate the larger portions of rice plants.
Again, I'm not sure. Someone could probably get an answer from a FB friend soon.
-
It's because there are limited land space in China and Vietnam so Hmong peeps have to adapt to their environment. I've seen some travel videos where Hmong carry soil up to the rocky mountain side to plan corn. It's sad.
-
Toumeng hit the "nail on the head" -- O0
-
It's because there are limited land space in China and Vietnam so Hmong peeps have to adapt to their environment. I've seen some travel videos where Hmong carry soil up to the rocky mountain side to plan corn. It's sad.
Hmmm, that is interesting, but i'm not sure i would necessarily classify the land space hmong had in laos as any better or different than what they had in china or vietnam. In fact, i'd go so far as to say it was much worse and more limited. Hmong only started to get land in the lowlands after the war, when the government made a concerted effort to get them out of the mountains and away from chao fa influence and when relatives in the states started sending them american money to buy lowland land.
-
You need to understand the political in China and Vietnam toward Hmong people then you will understand why Hmong used such landscape for farming.
-
Hmmm, that is interesting, but i'm not sure i would necessarily classify the land space hmong had in laos as any better or different than what they had in china or vietnam. In fact, i'd go so far as to say it was much worse and more limited. Hmong only started to get land in the lowlands after the war, when the government made a concerted effort to get them out of the mountains and away from chao fa influence and when relatives in the states started sending them american money to buy lowland land.
??? ... emmm someone needs to better educate themselves about geography and Hmong history before making these kind of ill-informed supposition. Hint: The mountains of China, especially in the Western frontier are not suitable for agriculture -- very little soil period; whereas the mountains of SE Asia - Laos to be exact - are rich and fertile soil, ideal for agriculture. Get it now.
Ua tsaug ... O0
-
??? ... emmm someone needs to better educate themselves about geography and Hmong history before making these kind of ill-informed supposition. Hint: The mountains of China, especially in the Western frontier are not suitable for agriculture -- very little soil period; whereas the mountains of SE Asia - Laos to be exact - are rich and fertile soil, ideal for agriculture. Get it now.
Ua tsaug ... O0
No, i don't get it. More education please.
Guizhou - 176,167 sq. km.
Laos - 236,800 sq. km.
source: http://info.hktdc.com/mktprof/china/guizhou.htm (http://info.hktdc.com/mktprof/china/guizhou.htm)
"With significant improvements in irrigation and terrace-farming, Guizhou has a strong agricultural sector. The province is one of the main producers of tobacco and its output ranked third in the country. Tea products, vegetables and some exotic fruits are famous both at home and abroad. Thanks to its biodiversity, Guizhou also has large varieties of herbs for industrial and medicinal uses.
The primary sector still accounted for 17.2% of the GDP. Major agricultural products include corn, rice, tobacco, tubers and rapeseeds. The output of tobacco ranked second in China, accounting for 11% of the national total. The province has over 3,700 types of herbs and is one of the leading producers of Chinese medicine in China. Animal husbandry and cash crop of local characteristic s will be the growth areas of the farming industry."
Geography Lesson: Guizhou is almost completely mountainous, Laos has more flat land than Guizhou. Guizhou is smaller than laos in area; yet, can sustain a population of 34,000,000 including 4,000,000 hmong/miao people while Laos' population is at 6,000,000 total. The "not suitable for agriculture" mountains of Guizhou produces numerous agricultural products for export to support a GDP that is almost 5x that of Laos' GDP.
Should we go on with Yunnan? Hint #1: Yunnan GDP $138.9 billion, Guizhou GDP $90.5 billion. Hint #2: Yunnan has a larger agricultural sector. Hint #3: Yunnan population is 45.9 million, Guizhou population is 34.7 million. Hint #4: No mountain is ideal for agriculture unless terraced. Hint #5: Your "rich and fertile soil" in the mountains of laos are not reflected in its GDP or the economic activities of hmong people, or the population size of laos, or the population size of hmong people.
ua tsaug. O0
-
It's because there are limited land space in China and Vietnam so Hmong peeps have to adapt to their environment. I've seen some travel videos where Hmong carry soil up to the rocky mountain side to plan corn. It's sad.
What would Jesus have said?
-
No, i don't get it. More education please.
Guizhou - 176,167 sq. km.
Laos - 236,800 sq. km.
source: http://info.hktdc.com/mktprof/china/guizhou.htm (http://info.hktdc.com/mktprof/china/guizhou.htm)
...
...
Yes, more education is not a problem.
source: Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou -- R. D. Jenkins
p. 13 "Much of Guizhou is part of the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau, which slopes downward from the Yunnan highlands towards the southeat, through Guizhou and into Guangxi. The altitude in Guizhou ranges from under 3,000 feet in the southeast to an average of about 4,200 feet in the southwest and over 5,000 feet in the northwest, with peaks rising much higher. The town of Weining in the northwest lies abve 7,300 feet. The plateau is composed of limestone, which, through a weathering process known as carbonization, has given rise to spectacular karst topography. Such topography does not allow the soil to absorb rainfall gradually, and many areas are prone to flash floods that can destroy crops ... The combination of relative warmth, high humidity, and heavy rainfall is favorable to the formation of karst topography. ..."
p. 14 "The geographer George Cressey estimates that the process of limestone carbonization is 10% complete in Yunnan, 50% complete in Guizhou, and 90% complete in Guangxi. "Thus in Yunnan, level land is found only at the orgininal level; in Kwangsi it is present at the new lower surface; while in intermediate Kweichow there is little flat land at any level." Most experts agree that no more than 4-5 percent of the land in Guizhou is flat."
p. 15 ... "There was little land available for the cultivation of life-sustaining crops, and the inhabitants were only able to eke out a bare existence for the soil, which is not very fertile."
You neglected the facts about overall geography of the landscape, which has been noted above. Not once did anyone deny what present day technology and advancement has been able to accomplish in terms of GPD in that region. That said, without the terraces and technological aide, one can easily say Guizhou and its surrounding countryside is nothing but wasteland. Let us also not forget the "fact" that ALL if not most of the fertile land and prosperity in China clearly is towards the East; Souteast to be exact -- definitely not the West. As a matter of fact, it is well known that the Western frontier of China, Guizhou and its countryside, are the most undeveloped and least modernized area -- the poorest regions of China. That's a no brainer, and as to why etc. -- that's also a given.
Ua tsaug ... ;)
-
Yes, more education is not a problem.
source: Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou -- R. D. Jenkins
...
You neglected the facts about overall geography of the landscape, which has been noted above. Not once did anyone deny what present day technology and advancement has been able to accomplish in terms of GPD in that region. That said, without the terraces and technological aide, one can easily say Guizhou and its surrounding countryside is nothing but wasteland. Let us also not forget the "fact" that ALL if not most of the fertile land and prosperity in China clearly is towards the East; Souteast to be exact -- definitely not the West. As a matter of fact, it is well known that the Western frontier of China, Guizhou and its countryside, are the most undeveloped and least modernized area -- the poorest regions of China. That's a no brainer, and as to why etc. -- that's also a given.
Ua tsaug ... ;)
Lemme get this straight...you r source, a book about politics in the region, describes some aspects of the region that are not suitable for agriculture and you conclude that the whole Yunnan-Guizhou corridor is 'not suitable for agriculture -- very little soil' and a 'wasteland'?
Even after seeing agricultural production that comes from this 'wasteland': 2nd in the country in tobacco production, tea, vegetables, fruits, corn, rice, tubers, rapeseed, one of the leading producer of chinese medicine, etc..., you're still going to insist on your stance that was based off a statement in a political history book? OK, that makes complete sense... :idiot2:
"You neglected the facts about overall geography of the landscape, which has been noted above." You neglect the obvious agricultural production. Here's more numbers for your consideration: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/china-agricultural-and-economic-data/national-and-provincial-data.aspx (http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/china-agricultural-and-economic-data/national-and-provincial-data.aspx)
2009 production
Apples: Guizhou 32,360,000 lbs / Yunnan 538,580,000 lbs
Corn: Guizhou 8,104,000,000 lbs / Yunnan 10,853,400,000 lbs
Grains: Guizhou 23,365,400,000 lbs / Yunnan 31,538,400,000 lbs
Grapes: Guizhou 83,460,000 lbs / Yunnan 334,180,000 lbs
Peanuts: Guizhou 146,280,000 lbs / Yunnan 142,620,000 lbs
Pears: Guizhou 335,440,000 lbs / Yunnan 557,360,000 lbs
Rapeseed: Guizhou 1,407,980,000 lbs / Yunnan 828,260,000 lbs
Rice: Guizhou 9,063,400,000 lbs / Yunnan 12,724,600,000 lbs
Soybean: Guizhou 317,400,000 lbs / Yunnan 581,200,000 lbs
Tubers: Guizhou 4,176,800,000 lbs / Yunnan 3,443,600,000 lbs
Vegetables: Guizhou 21,589,000,000 lbs / Yunnan 24,764,880,000 lbs
Wheat: Guizhou 890,400,000 lbs / Yunnan 1,846,000,000 lbs
Don't know what your point is about the central plains cause they will obviously be more fertile and productive and won't need terracing. The point of this debate was the fertility between two mountainous regions. Quite clearly, the numbers (population and agricultural) does not support your claims of this region as a non-productive 'wasteland'.
Ua tsaug. O0
-
;D ... :idiot2:
SVantha,
Your "red herring" rhetoric is rather amusing ... ::)
Obviously you missed this fact: "The plateau is composed of limestone, which, through a weathering process known as carbonization, has given rise to spectacular karst topography. Such topography does not allow the soil to absorb rainfall gradually, and many areas are prone to flash floods that can destroy crops . ..."
p. 14 " ... limestone carbonization is 10% complete in Yunnan, 50% complete in Guizhou, and 90% complete in Guangxi. ... Most experts agree that no more than 4-5 percent of the land in Guizhou is flat.""
These are not political jargon whatsoever, but in fact, are geographical facts/data of the land as a whole.
Why do you think they have to terrace throughout the entire region in order to cultivate, or raise any sort of crop? Duh ... O0 (Ironic isn't it that this "terracing" is unheard of nor used and/or required in SE Asia -- much less anywhere else in the world, including the USA. Hmmm? One wonders why? ... O0)
Ua tsaug ... :)
(btw -- the topic was "terrace" aka geography. Not annual or regional cultivation yields. Again, MINUS the "terraces", there would be little to NO cultivation. Again ... duh ... ;))
-
You guys still arguing? :o
-
You guys still arguing? :o
8) ... an "education" was requested; thus an education was provided on the "geography" of Western China -- the Guizhou countryside specifically.
Ua tsaug ... O0
-
So did someone learned something here?
-
So did someone learned something here?
No. We are all guessing. And no one can take those statements to be true.
-
You're so hung up on the topography. There are limestone and karst formations throughout SEAsia. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia has numerous terraced mountains and last i checked, they were SEAsian countries. Just because these facts are not stated in your book, does not make it untrue. Is this book like the ultimate authority for you? LOL. Any quick google search would tell you these facts. How ignorant can you be to make such a state like:
...(Ironic isn't it that this "terracing" is unheard of nor used and/or required in SE Asia -- much less anywhere else in the world, including the USA. Hmmm? One wonders why? ... O0)
I would read more than "Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou" to get facts about China, SEAsia or the world. For your information, the Incans in S. America used terraces for agriculture independant of the old world, as well as numerous countries throughout the globe. I know this info won't be stated in your book, but a quick google search would tell you the truth of that.
ROFL, it seems like facts and figures are not sufficient for you unless they were stated in "Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou"...seriously, my mind is blown. :idiot2:
ua tsaug. O0
-
SVanTha, ( ;D)
Is not "terraces" due to the fact that the topography of Guizhou is inefficient and inappropriate for cultivation -- specifically because the land is mountainous and of little to no fertile soil, being mostly composed of limestone. Talk about :idiot2: . You also mention "terraces" in S. America among the Incans. Hmmm, ironic, why did they "terrace" there then eh? Oh, yeah, because they were high in the Andes, where there is/was little to "NO FLAT LAND" for cultivation. DUH! Again, :idiot2: .
Keep grabbing at "straws" ... ;D
And you mention SE Asia; "Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia has numerous terraced mountains ... " Again, DUH! You just "self-incriminated", :2funny: ... O0 (But just for LAFFS, emmm, don't get "rice paddies" confused with "terraces" ok, as it is a known fact, that that methodology is the norm or most popular practice throughout SE Asia. Oh! Guess what? No "terraces" whatsoever. Why? Because all the "rice paddies" are in low flat non-mountainous fertile soil. DUH!)
Ua tsaug ... :)
(fyi -- one simple source was more than sufficient to rectify your narrow rethoric. Beyond that, well, let's just say you've already "incriminated" yourself, so it's pointless ... O0)
-
SVanTha, ( ;D)
Is not "terraces" due to the fact that the topography of Guizhou is inefficient and inappropriate for cultivation -- specifically because the land is mountainous and of little to no fertile soil, being mostly composed of limestone. Talk about :idiot2: .
Terracing is an agricultural technique used on ANY sloped land, mountains being the most sloped. It's a crazy, wild, wild guess but i'm pretty sure the mountains and hills of Laos are also sloped along with the mountains and hills of SEAsia and the rest of the world...
Again, agricultural production numbers and population numbers do not support your 'fertility' claims of the region. Should i go over the numbers again? Also, the region is not one big limestone and karst formation as you have concluded from your book. Do i need to repost agricultural production numbers to disprove this false conclusion?
You also mention "terraces" in S. America among the Incans. Hmmm, ironic, why did they "terrace" there then eh? Oh, yeah, because they were high in the Andes, where there is/was little to "NO FLAT LAND" for cultivation. DUH! Again, :idiot2: .
Keep grabbing at "straws" ... ;D
:2funny: :2funny: :2funny: You mean the terraces that you insisted did not exist? Let me catch my breath... :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:. Do i need to post pictures of terraces on gently sloping lands to convince you that it's a technique that can be used on ANY sloping land? I better, since it's not stated in "Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou" so you won't believe it. Pics at bottom.
And you mention SE Asia; "Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia has numerous terraced mountains ... " Again, DUH! You just "self-incriminated", :2funny: ... O0
:2funny: :2funny: :2funny: Again, what terraces are you talking about? According to you, terraces are non-existent in SEAsia or the rest of the world... :2funny: :idiot2: :2funny: :idiot2:
(But just for LAFFS, emmm, don't get "rice paddies" confused with "terraces" ok, as it is a known fact, that that methodology is the norm or most popular practice throughout SE Asia. Oh! Guess what? No "terraces" whatsoever. Why? Because all the "rice paddies" are in low flat non-mountainous fertile soil. DUH!)
Ua tsaug ... :)
And your point about flat, lowland farming is.........irr elevant, like what you just wrote and your arguments in this debate. :idiot2:
(fyi -- one simple source was more than sufficient to rectify your narrow rethoric. Beyond that, well, let's just say you've already "incriminated" yourself, so it's pointless ... O0)
ROFL, ROFL, ROFL.
Agricultural production numbers from the Guizhou-Yunnan plateau: i've incriminated myself on the fertility of this region. Clearly, it is one large limestone and karst wasteland and these numbers are fabrications meant to directly contradict the holy book: "Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou."
Terrace technology in SEAsia and the rest of the world: i've also clearly incriminated myself on the extent and application of this technology. Clearly, the existence of terraces outside of the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau is fabricated and only the mountains and hills of the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau are sloped. However, if we imagine they could exist (i know its a difficult thing to do), terrace technology should only be applied to the most sloped of sloped mountainsides; if they do exist.
Disclaimer for pics: This is only hypothetical, "Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou" do not support these claims. Pictures of terrace technology on rolling hills and gentle slopes must be ignored as they are only figments of our imagination and not consistent with the teachings of the holy book.
Ua tsaug. O0
(http://i.imgur.com/6Z8CHN8.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/KKUV3OX.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/6JpaMxC.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/5Hzgazj.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/5UhukxM.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/JoOfNMX.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/655VJwK.jpg)
-
SVanTha, ( ;D)
All your efforts only further validates your "fallacy", LMAO, ... O0 Your persistence has flawed if not outright failed you, but keep trying ... :D
Let's review and analyze your "rethoric"? See the striking similarities that you yourself have "quoted" and have laboriously yet effectively proven in regards to the application of "terrace" on a global scale.
"For your information, the Incans in S. America used terraces for agriculture ... " along the Andes mountain range.
"Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia has numerous terraced mountains ... "
"Pictures of terrace technology on rolling hills and gentle slopes ..."
Ua tsaug ... :)
Oops! Missed this "quote":
"Terracing is an agricultural technique used on ANY sloped land, mountains being the most sloped."
-
Have you run out of debate points from your book? You seem to have lost focus and are backtracking. Let me get us back on track:
me: There's not much difference between the geographical living conditions of hmong in china, vietnam and laos.
you: O yes there is! In china, they were living in a mountainous limestone and karst wasteland!
me: Not really a wasteland. Here's population and agricultural production numbers to back it up.
you: (ignores population and agricultural production numbers) It is so a mountainous limestone and karst wasteland! My special book says so and if my special book says so, it is so. Besides, everyone and anyone knows you only create terraces for agriculture in mountainous limestone and karst wastelands. And I'm right because there are no terraces anywhere else in the world (my personal favorite point of your's btw).
me: :2funny: you think there are no terraces in SEAsia or the rest of the world!?!? :2funny:. (i admit, this always makes me giggle, thank you).
you: See, see, even though i don't technically believe there are terraces in the rest of the world, there being terraces in the rest of the world incriminates you; especially when these non-existent terraces are on mountainsides because the terraces in Yunnan-Guizhou are also on mountainsides, so i've somehow made a really good point because there are terraces on mountainsides everywhere and I just know somehow that it incriminates you and makes a really good point for me...somehow.
me: Ummmm, what is your point again? Terraces are features on sloped land and sloped land is not exclusive to the Yunna-Guizhou plateau; neither is it exclusive to mountainsides. Here's some pictures.
you: (ignores pictures or fact that terraces are on hills and gentle slopes as well as mountainsides) No, no, you're already incriminated because there are terraces on mountainsides everywhere and the terraces in Yunnan-Guizhou are also on mountainsides so I've made a really, really good point, whatever it is... Oh, i'm only hypothetically speaking because remember, i don't believe there are terraces in SEAsia or the rest of the world (always brings a giggle).
-----------
That about summed it up?
So you can't disprove my numbers, your terrace theory was hilariously blown apart and you've been unable to provide credible evidence to back up one single point.
Honestly, i don't care about anything else anymore. I'm just really, really, really interested in your "no terrace anywhere outside of Yunnan-Guizhou" stance. I think you're on to something!!! I think it may revolutionize agriculture as we know it in SEAsia and the rest of the world. Lets explore this fascinating door together!!!
-
SVanTha, ( ;D ... :2funny: ... O0)
Ua tsaug ... :)
-
So are the numbers the result of the terraces?