Newest Possible Population Numbers (including animals)

[SionEwig]

Here this is finally. This is based on several different polls and various statistical sets of data scattered throughout various threads. Most of this did manage to fit very close to what we had already been using, a few things had to be adjusted a slight bit, and some hit with a big hammer. But then I still think that some of the original numbers were extrapolated poorly. If anyone want to do it different, then go for it.

The primary pieces of data that we had were the number of Members/Families ISOTed originally, and thus the maximum number of both Large and Medium animals. 694 is the original starting number

694 Members/Families Originally ISOTed
-42 that became the first Conquistadors and original Homesteaders

652 Members/Families left. with an average of 4.99 people per family
we will have 3253 people total. Before any subtractions due to death.

Of the 652/3253

88% go to Berkeley - 574 Members/Families (2864 people)
08% stay at Fort Ian - 52 Members/Families (259 people)
04% set out on their own - 26 Members/Families (130 people)

These new percentages are taken from the poll "An Appeal to the Community"

Berkeley breakdown as follows
802 Men
773 Women
1289 Children

Fort Ian breakdown as follows
73 Men
70 Women
116 Children

New Homesteaders breakdown as follows
36 Men
35 Women
59 Children

Large Animals Totals (does not include any deaths)
400 Horses
75 Donkeys
75 Oxen
56 Beef Cattle
25 Dairy Cattle
20 Llamas
1 Jack Mule

652 Total which matches the number of Members/Families

Now, I broke down the large animals as to which goes with which group according to the same percentages as for the people. Originally this was not done, though the totals were correctly done. I think that this is only fair to do it this way.

Berkeley Large Animal Breakdown
352 Horses
66 Donkeys
66 Oxen
49 Beef Cattle
22 Dairy Cattle
18 Llamas
1 Jack Mule

574 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for Berkeley

Fort Ian Large Animal Breakdown
32 Horses
6 Donkeys
6 Oxen
4 Beef Cattle
2 Dairy Cattle
2 Llamas

52 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for Fort Ian

New Homesteaders Large Animal Breakdown
16 Horses
3 Donkeys
3 Oxen
3 Beef Cattle
1 Dairy Cow

26 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for New Homesteading

Medium Animal Totals

I could not actually final any kind of total for Medium Animals except one that was only for Berkeley and it had numbers that did not match the number of Members. Now easily corrected and I will leave that to the group as a whole and also the numbers of Medium Animals for the Fort Ian group and the New Homesteaders.

The Original numbers for Medium Animals for Berkeley
246 Pigs
200 Sheep
72 Goats
44 Dogs

562 Total which does not match the number of Members/Families for Berkeley

Small Animals

As I remember this was somewhat extrapolated from what people said so it may need adjustment. Also there were none listed for Fort Ian and I find it hard to believe that someone there didn't bring a few, the numbers can be extrapolated from the Berkeley numbers easily and again I think this would be fair.

Berkeley Small Animals
96 Chickens
53 Rabbits
14 Cats
3 Small Dogs

[SionEwig]

Even though these numbers may not be the most absolutely correct by the various polls and statictical data derived from them as well as various adjustments that some felt were necessary, I recommend that they be accepted and we get on with the game.

Except for any animal trading that may go on befroe the Grand Trek of course:D.

[Ward]

Here this is finally. This is based on several different polls and various statistical sets of data scattered throughout various threads. Most of this did manage to fit very close to what we had already been using, a few things had to be adjusted a slight bit, and some hit with a big hammer. But then I still think that some of the original numbers were extrapolated poorly. If anyone want to do it different, then go for it.

The primary pieces of data that we had were the number of Members/Families ISOTed originally, and thus the maximum number of both Large and Medium animals. 694 is the original starting number

694 Members/Families Originally ISOTed
-42 that became the first Conquistadors and original Homesteaders

652 Members/Families left. with an average of 4.99 people per family
we will have 3253 people total. Before any subtractions due to death.

Of the 652/3253

88% go to Berkeley - 574 Members/Families (2864 people)
08% stay at Fort Ian - 52 Members/Families (259 people)
04% set out on their own - 26 Members/Families (130 people)

These new percentages are taken from the poll "An Appeal to the Community"

Berkeley breakdown as follows
802 Men
773 Women
1289 Children

Fort Ian breakdown as follows
73 Men
70 Women
116 Children

New Homesteaders breakdown as follows
36 Men
35 Women
59 Children

Large Animals Totals (does not include any deaths)
400 Horses
75 Donkeys
75 Oxen
56 Beef Cattle
25 Dairy Cattle
20 Llamas
1 Jack Mule

652 Total which matches the number of Members/Families

Now, I broke down the large animals as to which goes with which group according to the same percentages as for the people. Originally this was not done, though the totals were correctly done. I think that this is only fair to do it this way.

Berkeley Large Animal Breakdown
352 Horses
66 Donkeys
66 Oxen
49 Beef Cattle
22 Dairy Cattle
18 Llamas
1 Jack Mule

574 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for Berkeley

Fort Ian Large Animal Breakdown
32 Horses
6 Donkeys
6 Oxen
4 Beef Cattle
2 Dairy Cattle
2 Llamas

52 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for Fort Ian

New Homesteaders Large Animal Breakdown
16 Horses
3 Donkeys
3 Oxen
3 Beef Cattle
1 Dairy Cow

26 Total which matches the number of Members/Families for New Homesteading

Medium Animal Totals

I could not actually final any kind of total for Medium Animals except one that was only for Berkeley and it had numbers that did not match the number of Members. Now easily corrected and I will leave that to the group as a whole and also the numbers of Medium Animals for the Fort Ian group and the New Homesteaders.

The Original numbers for Medium Animals for Berkeley
246 Pigs
200 Sheep
72 Goats
44 Dogs

562 Total which does not match the number of Members/Families for Berkeley

Small Animals

As I remember this was somewhat extrapolated from what people said so it may need adjustment. Also there were none listed for Fort Ian and I find it hard to believe that someone there didn't bring a few, the numbers can be extrapolated from the Berkeley numbers easily and again I think this would be fair.

Berkeley Small Animals
96 Chickens
53 Rabbits
14 Cats
3 Small Dogs


Just rember most of the chickens that came over are mine like 25 of them because every one 14 and older brought 2 chicken across and the next 3 kids brought 1erach over,

[SionEwig]

Just rember most of the chickens that came over are mine like 25 of them because every one 14 and older brought 2 chicken across and the next 3 kids brought 1erach over,

Hey, I was just going off of lists of animals that Psycho had posted. I really don't care who they belong to, I just wanted to include them for the sake of completeness.:D

[Dave Howery]

wait! Why are there so many more men than women? Did a lot of people come along without wives? I feel sorry for them....

[Norbert]

wait! Why are there so many more men than women? Did a lot of people come along without wives? I feel sorry for them....

I was wondering the same thing.

[Ward]

I was wondering the same thing.


Oh my God My 14 year old Granddaughter will have the pick of the men .

[Forum Lurker]

You seem to be saying that as if it were a good thing.

[Ward]

You seem to be saying that as if it were a good thing.


Well she will not have to take the first boy that comes up to her .

[Psychomeltdown]

Well she will not have to take the first boy that comes up to her .
Aw, and I thought you were setting Urkel and her up. :D

[Ward]

Aw, and I thought you were setting Urkel and her up. :D


She said he to small for her . :D








Opp's that short for her .:eek:

[Forum Lurker]

Well she will not have to take the first boy that comes up to her .
Assuming everything stays consensual.

[Ward]

Assuming everything stays consensual.


If it dose not stay that way Knowing her and the wife she will have his balls made into a neckless which she would wear .:eek:

[Grimm Reaper]

Surely we brought more small animals, or are all the females pregnant?

I was also under the impression that every bachelor got a celebrity clone wife, with a Paris Hilton replicant to all who couldn't choose.:eek:

[SionEwig]

wait! Why are there so many more men than women? Did a lot of people come along without wives? I feel sorry for them....

I'm not 100% positive why it turned out this way. It was part of all the data manipulation that Darkest did. However, i think that a bunch of it came about when several people brought along everyone who was living in their house. As an example, Member Phred lives at his parents house and has some siblings living there also. so from 1 member you can easily get 2 adult males and 2 adult females plus possibly more adult males (siblings) who did not get wives. It is actually not that big of a difference, I used figures developed by others and they came to 28% men, 27% women, and 45% children. Remember it is only 29 more men than women at Berkeley and 3 more at Fort Ian. If it becomes a problem, it will be more of one at Fort Ian or with the New Homesteaders than at Berkeley.

More importantly, can we go with these numbers as official so that the rest of planning can get done?

[Psychomeltdown]

Plus you have to wonder who Kit, Fell, and others brought who are not of the heterosexual variety.



The reason I went with a higher male pop is simply they'll be doing the most work. I also had a higher adult population, 45 percent of 2781 is a lot and nearly half the board members said it was only them and their spouse...

[Norbert]

Plus you have to wonder who Kit, Fell, and others brought who are not of the heterosexual variety.



The reason I went with a higher male pop is simply they'll be doing the most work. I also had a higher adult population, 45 percent of 2781 is a lot and nearly half the board members said it was only them and their spouse...

There were very few instances in the poll for 'No spouse' I thought. I am uncertain I trust the numbers at the moment.

[SionEwig]

There were very few instances in the poll for 'No spouse' I thought. I am uncertain I trust the numbers at the moment.

Well, I am fairly sure that the numbers are flawed, but Psycho did very well with the information that was available. I tend to think that the average number in each family is actually too high (4.99) but that is due to the original poll and who chose to respond. When you have respondants like Ward (bringing a clan, not that I have a problem with that) and then a couple others also bringing very large families with them, it is bound to skew the results way off of what we might expect.

However, if we start trying to go back and redo the numbers with better data, we will be weeks before we get going again. That is why I propose that we just accept these numbers and get on with the game. Otherwise we might as well just start over the game from the beginning, which I would rather not do at this time.

[Psychomeltdown]

However, if we start trying to go back and redo the numbers with better data, we will be weeks before we get going again. That is why I propose that we just accept these numbers and get on with the game. Otherwise we might as well just start over the game from the beginning, which I would rather not do at this time.
I'm all for accepting them, I just like to complain about things. Plus i've been extrapolating my own data based on the numbers I came up with and now I'm going to have to redo them all over again.

Plus I had a lot more chickens, rabbits, and cats brought along. though I figure we can play with that data, after all these were brought as cargo.


Let's progress forward, now.


I'm all for taking these from the Fort ianites. Trading them or whatever.


6 Donkeys
4 Beef Cattle
2 Llama

mainly just so that we can keep the herds complete. all cattle, lamas, and donkeys in our control. We can trade them pigs and more dairy cows or horses...

[Norbert]

However, if we start trying to go back and redo the numbers with better data, we will be weeks before we get going again. That is why I propose that we just accept these numbers and get on with the game. Otherwise we might as well just start over the game from the beginning, which I would rather not do at this time.


I'll agree with that. Lets try avoid more delays and get back on track. Though I think being able to take a break helped people.

[SionEwig]

I'm all for taking these from the Fort ianites. Trading them or whatever.


6 Donkeys
4 Beef Cattle
2 Llama

mainly just so that we can keep the herds complete. all cattle, lamas, and donkeys in our control. We can trade them pigs and more dairy cows or horses...


While I think us using animals while they are available to help out at Fort Ian and then us getting use of others in return for the trek is a fantastic idea as long as both sides agree to it, I want us to be real damn careful on actually swapping them.

Let us first remember that the animals do not belong to the group, but to individuals and I'm sure that tohse individuals at least remember what kind of animals they brought along if not which ones. And that those individuals probably had a reason that they wanted to bring certain types of animals and may not want to swap them.

Also, I would rather have the Dairy cattle over the Beef cattle, we will need that milk a heck of a lot more than the beef (though if you can get what you want with swapping pigs I won't object, though the pigs owners just might).

And yes, we should have a lot more chickens and other small animals, with Berkeley having 574 Members/Families I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't have more like 500 or more chickens.

[Psychomeltdown]

I think i said that the animals would belong to the community, as Community Property. We can't afford individual ownership of animals at the moment, due to their scarcity.

All or most animals have been collected, and your ownership of what animal has been noted.

When the numbers of our animals have greatly increased and we are no longer in a command economy, then there will be an effort to reimburse those that had their animals requisitioned. Though it may not be the exact animal you brought with you, it will hopefully be of similar species.

Those that require use of an animal, herders, rangers, loggers, etc, are allowed to keep the animals brought with them. as long as they are of a breed that is qualified for the work they are doing. This only relates to Large and medium animals, small animals basically are those that have them. Though it would be nice if they kept them in a large area, just free them of having to care for them and leave them in quasi professional hands.


For now it is the survival of the herds that truly matter, not who owns what.



that has been my thought, though Glen may slap it down whenever he feels like it. For now I stand by those words and will keep it enforced to the best of my abilities.


Also, I would rather have the Dairy cattle over the Beef cattle, we will need that milk a heck of a lot more than the beef (though if you can get what you want with swapping pigs I won't object, though the pigs owners just might)

I'd love to get my hands on all the diary cows, but I don't think the Fort Ianites will go for it. The Beef Cattle, the llamas, seem our best option. Just to keep the herd together and relieve them of another burden that will eat up their own time and manpower. Less different types of animals they have to care for, the better it is they can efficiently use their time.

[SionEwig]

I think i said that the animals would belong to the community, as Community Property. We can't afford individual ownership of animals at the moment, due to their scarcity.

Just because you say it does not make it so. If we are going to try for even a little bit of reality here, we need to acknowledge that all these NPCs, not to mention the active players, are not going to accede to your wishes necessarily. Personally, I think that you would have already had trouble with the collectivization of the large and medium animals. I know that my family would not have turned over our dog for instance and probably not the mule either (though I have let that slip).

While you may have a point about us not being able to afford individual ownership, any attempt needs to be done carefully, otherwise you might have even more people deciding to either join one of the other two independent homesteading groups, starting a new homesteading group, or perhaps staying at Fort Ian.


All or most animals have been collected, and your ownership of what animal has been noted.

When the numbers of our animals have greatly increased and we are no longer in a command economy, then there will be an effort to reimburse those that had their animals requisitioned. Though it may not be the exact animal you brought with you, it will hopefully be of similar species.

You might want to make a greater effort to make sure that people get their animals brought back. Many thus far have been fairly specific on the animal they brought (though that mostly seems to apply to horses).

Those that require use of an animal, herders, rangers, loggers, etc, are allowed to keep the animals brought with them. as long as they are of a breed that is qualified for the work they are doing. This only relates to Large and medium animals, small animals basically are those that have them. Though it would be nice if they kept them in a large area, just free them of having to care for them and leave them in quasi professional hands.


For now it is the survival of the herds that truly matter, not who owns what.



that has been my thought, though Glen may slap it down whenever he feels like it. For now I stand by those words and will keep it enforced to the best of my abilities.

Not Glen necessarily, but the vast group of people out there who the animals actually belong to.




I'd love to get my hands on all the diary cows, but I don't think the Fort Ianites will go for it. The Beef Cattle, the llamas, seem our best option. Just to keep the herd together and relieve them of another burden that will eat up their own time and manpower. Less different types of animals they have to care for, the better it is they can efficiently use their time.

I think that it will have to be a heck of a deal for any of the large animals, and then I really want to see how you convince the people how have which ever type of animals you use as trade that it was in their best interest for you to have traded their animals away. Not that it's not possible, just I would like to see your plan there.

[Psychomeltdown]

Just because you say it does not make it so. If we are going to try for even a little bit of reality here, we need to acknowledge that all these NPCs, not to mention the active players, are not going to accede to your wishes necessarily. Personally, I think that you would have already had trouble with the collectivization of the large and medium animals. I know that my family would not have turned over our dog for instance and probably not the mule either (though I have let that slip).

While you may have a point about us not being able to afford individual ownership, any attempt needs to be done carefully, otherwise you might have even more people deciding to either join one of the other two independent homesteading groups, starting a new homesteading group, or perhaps staying at Fort Ian.

Well, most of this was done prior to knowing who was leading this group. After all it wasn't until Day 6 or 7 that we even know who was running the show. prior to that it was mainly Ward and up to those who were doing whatever. Ward had no qualms prior to his mni stroke.

While Glen may not wish to continue with this, that's up to him. if is wishes to fire me, fine.

But it's what was done, basically taking the animals, telling whoever that it was needed to be done and that they didn't have the time to properly take care of the animals.

Though they are in the communal herds it does not make them Community Property, I think that will be up to Glen. i believe that they should be turned into Community property.

and Dogs don't include what I've been doing. Mainly the Large Herd animals and the others, sheep, goats, pigs.

You might want to make a greater effort to make sure that people get their animals brought back. Many thus far have been fairly specific on the animal they brought (though that mostly seems to apply to horses).
I've told this to Glen, also. The animals were basically taken and the type was recorded, not the specific animal itself. So we can't readily identify what animals were a specific persons.

Bad record keeping, sure. But things were still chaotic in the first days.


I think that it will have to be a heck of a deal for any of the large animals, and then I really want to see how you convince the people how have which ever type of animals you use as trade that it was in their best interest for you to have traded their animals away. Not that it's not possible, just I would like to see your plan there.
think of it like a Bank. You put in your money and later you might get more back. Meanwhile the money is used by the bank how they see fit. In this case it's the animals. You put them in and later you may get back more, not the same animal exactly, but the type you put in. And as stated before a record was kept as to what type of animal you put in.

[Norbert]

Its a good point to say people would not want to give up their animals, even if it is a pain to take care of. People today are Very Possessive. Trying to take the animals away from them just because someone says its in the collective interest to do so will not go over with 99% of us. If I had a cow instead of a horse, I would allow it to be in the collective herd, but it is still my cow. I will allow some of the by-products (such as milk) go to the people who are keeping an eye on it, but I will always consider the majority of what it produces as mine.

I brought a horse, which at first I loaned to the Rangers (I am now using it on the scouting expedition). As long as they can use it and I am not, and they are not abusing it, nor maiming it, it is fine by me, because they need it.

Telling people that they need to turn over their animals just is not a good idea. It will only make people resentful of those who tell them that. It would be like a Government telling everyone that they had to turn over their TVs and Computers over 'for the Greater Good'. Historically, 'For the Greater Good' only made people mad.

I suggest we drop the suggestion of people giving up their animals. I've heard from more than one person that they do not like the idea. I've only heard from one person who does agree, and that is the one who brought it up!

[Psychomeltdown]

Its a good point to say people would not want to give up their animals, even if it is a pain to take care of. People today are Very Possessive. Trying to take the animals away from them just because someone says its in the collective interest to do so will not go over with 99% of us. If I had a cow instead of a horse, I would allow it to be in the collective herd, but it is still my cow. I will allow some of the by-products (such as milk) go to the people who are keeping an eye on it, but I will always consider the majority of what it produces as mine.

See this doesn’t really work, because a lot of these animals aren’t going to be producing anything for a looong time. Horses and the other draft animals are needed because they can do work. Diary cows and maybe goats because they are producing milk. But the rest is just animals producing nothing and taking labor to maintain.

If it’s personal ownership you’re going for, what’s to stop nearly half the whole camp from denying you the use of their horses or oxen? We’ll basically be needing every animal that can pull when we head to Berkley and what if a lot of families only want their animals to haul their own things? Or hell, if someone demands their sheep/pig back and ends up killing it? We can’t afford to lose any of these animals.

These animals are resources, simple as that.

Telling people that they need to turn over their animals just is not a good idea. It will only make people resentful of those who tell them that. It would be like a Government telling everyone that they had to turn over their TVs and Computers over 'for the Greater Good'. Historically, 'For the Greater Good' only made people mad. But that was usually when the Great Good was screwing over everyone. Hopefully I’m not the type to screw people over. I'm fairly honest and the welfare of the animals under my control is what I'm looking out for.

I suggest we drop the suggestion of people giving up their animals. I've heard from more than one person that they do not like the idea. I've only heard from one person who does agree, and that is the one who brought it up!
I will continue to push for this and I will hope that everyone sees reason.

[Forum Lurker]

I'm definitely in favor of group management. I brought a milch cow, which was passed into the care of the community by the first day; many others will have as little idea of what do to with the animal as I do.

[Norbert]

If it’s personal ownership you’re going for, what’s to stop nearly half the whole camp from denying you the use of their horses or oxen? We’ll basically be needing every animal that can pull when we head to Berkley and what if a lot of families only want their animals to haul their own things? Or hell, if someone demands their sheep/pig back and ends up killing it? We can’t afford to lose any of these animals.

These animals are resources, simple as that.

But that was usually when the Great Good was screwing over everyone. Hopefully I’m not the type to screw people over. I'm fairly honest and the welfare of the animals under my control is what I'm looking out for.


I will continue to push for this and I will hope that everyone sees reason.

One, it may happen in the short term that the use of the animal is denied, but I do not think so. Most of the people sortof know the others, and we are unlike most of society in that if someone asks a question, someone takes the trouble to look up the answer. I think the same can be said about sharing our resources.

If Person A refuses to help B, B will probably not offer to help A. And it will spread that this has happened, and soon C, D, And E will refuse, at least until A comes back in line. It is Societal Peer Pressure to Co-Operate.

And as I said, people feel that what is theirs is theirs, and will resist the movement to take anything away from them. Plain, Simple Fact.

I am not saying that group management is not the right way to go, just the method you want to impose.

[SionEwig]

I'm definitely in favor of group management. I brought a milch cow, which was passed into the care of the community by the first day; many others will have as little idea of what do to with the animal as I do.

No argument with you, but there is a BIG difference between group management and community ownership. I think that a good number will happily give over their animals to group management, but that very few would have responded in the affirmtive if someone came by collecting all of the animals as was given.

But it's what was done, basically taking the animals, telling whoever that it was needed to be done and that they didn't have the time to properly take care of the animals.

[Norbert]

Was there ever a breakdown of male to female animals, and would there have been a discussion on the types of animals that were to be brought along?


Norbert & Ward

[Ghost 88]

Was there ever a breakdown of male to female animals, and would there have been a discussion on the types of animals that were to be brought along?


Norbert & Ward
Psycho's posted one several times IIRC

[Norbert]

Psycho's posted one several times IIRC

We've been looking, and are not finding it. Which thread and page?


(Or are Ward and I particularly dense in our memories today?):o

[Psychomeltdown]

Psycho's posted one several times IIRC
But Sion pretty much made up his own numbers and ran with it. I've always figure a nine to one ratio.


Gods, i do all this calculation and thinking on things and then others come run roughshod over it and post their own thing... :( :rolleyes: :D

[Psychomeltdown]

We've been looking, and are not finding it. Which thread and page?


(Or are Ward and I particularly dense in our memories today?):o
Statistics Thread, http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showpost.php?p=385898&postcount=31

[SionEwig]

But Sion pretty much made up his own numbers and ran with it. I've always figure a nine to one ratio.


Gods, i do all this calculation and thinking on things and then others come run roughshod over it and post their own thing... :( :rolleyes: :D

I made up absolutely NO numbers. I used numbers and ratios provided by others. As far as the male to female ratio of the animals, I haven't addressed that because you already did so and I felt that it was a fairly good estimation.

[Glen]

No argument with you, but there is a BIG difference between group management and community ownership. I think that a good number will happily give over their animals to group management, but that very few would have responded in the affirmtive if someone came by collecting all of the animals as was given.

Ditto here, SionEwig.

I will with great caution and trepidation allow group management and use of our very limited resources under our starting conditions as a necessity only. I will encourage the easing away from that as quickly as we can safely do so, and try to lay the groundwork even now for that eventuality.

I do not hold with community ownership, if that means the taking of private property without compensation and making it that of the community. If the community needs to obtain items, or to produce items, using private property and/or individual labor, that needs to be justly compensated.

[Psychomeltdown]

what's the Breakdown for medium animals in Fort Ian?

[SionEwig]

what's the Breakdown for medium animals in Fort Ian?

Don't know, never saw one. If you have added the additional animals to our medium animal list (we were short 12 medium animals, may I suggest another dozen goats), then we could just divide each catagory of them by 11 since Fort Ian is 1/11th our size (approx.). Or we could wait on Jolo to be able to get back on line and let him decide :D.

[Psychomeltdown]

Here was my posting from the Statistics Thread.


IAN'S APARTMENT: those staying at Ian's Apartment.
TOTAL: 272,: 90 Board members
MEN: 113
WOMEN: 108
CHILDREN: 51


90 Large animals
90 Medium animals
50 Small animals

Large Animals
35 Horses 30 female, 5 male
19 Cattle 15 female, 4 male
18 oxen 15 female, 3 male
18 Dairy cows 14 female, 2 male

Medium Animals
40 pigs 36 female, 4 male
40 Sheep 36 female, 4 male
10 Dogs 6 female, 4 male

Small Animals
36 Chickens, 30 female, 6 male
12 Cats 10 female, 2 male
2 Small Dogs 2 female

but I guess we could change it about? You have only 52 members at Fort Ian, whereas I had 90...

so:

Fort Ian Large Animal Breakdown
32 Horses
6 Donkeys
6 Oxen
4 Beef Cattle
2 Dairy Cattle
2 Llamas

Medium Animals
17 Pigs
15 Sheep
12 goats
8 Dogs

[Norbert]

Don't know, never saw one. If you have added the additional animals to our medium animal list (we were short 12 medium animals, may I suggest another dozen goats), then we could just divide each catagory of them by 11 since Fort Ian is 1/11th our size (approx.). Or we could wait on Jolo to be able to get back on line and let him decide :D.

I'd go with goats. Angoras produce both wool and milk: Heck, they almost look more like a sheep!