Sleeping sickness in Bison

Who would the colonization of America be effected if there was a form of sleeping sickness in bison? What happens the Amerindian population that depends on them? Do we fail to expand west until the train?
 
If sleeping sickness was part of the natural local insect parasite environment then the bison would like wild African animals have build have some form of immunity. Just as there are herds of wildebeests & zebra in tsetse fly area there would still be herds of bison to hunt and the locals would probably have some herbal mixture to rub on to stop the "Buffalo Fly" biting, however the introduction of European cattle and horses would be difficult. The settlement of the great plains would slower maybe not until the introduction of tractors to plough the cornfields of Oklahoma.
 
If sleeping sickness was part of the natural local insect parasite environment then the bison would like wild African animals have build have some form of immunity. Just as there are herds of wildebeests & zebra in tsetse fly area there would still be herds of bison to hunt and the locals would probably have some herbal mixture to rub on to stop the "Buffalo Fly" biting, however the introduction of European cattle and horses would be difficult. The settlement of the great plains would slower maybe not until the introduction of tractors to plough the cornfields of Oklahoma.
thanks I was wondering if that would be the case so maybe the 1920's or 30's then?
 
If horses are impossible to use on the Great Plains, than you have completely butterflied all of the extremely powerful Plains Indians. They'll still be there, but they'll be unrecognisable. In turn, this will make settlement of the more bountiful parts of the Great Plains slightly easier, though balanced out by the disease environment. However, it'll probably also mean that the High Plains in Kansas, Texas Panhandle, East Colorado, etc. are mostly sparsely settled, also meaning there is no Dust Bowl since there will be minimal abuse of the land. Since a lot of the early settlement of the High Plains came from places in the Northern Plains like in Eastern Montana, those places (where the disease environment will be better) will stay more populated, though still be pretty empty.
 
With American grain exports greatly diminished, food will be more expensive everywhere after the 1850s or so compared to OTL. With higher food prices, landowners and greater farmers will prosper, urban workers will have lower disposable incomes (and unskilled workers with their low wages will be even more malnourished than OTL), and aristocracy will be economically and politically stronger everywhere (even in Eastern Europe, where they were strong enough already in OTL). OTOH, it will stimulate improvements in agricultural productivity (for instance, artificial fertilizers may come earlier and spread faster, because European agrarian interests will have more money to spend). Such improvements, if they come early enough, will partly cancel harmful effects of lower American grain supplies.
 
With American grain exports greatly diminished, food will be more expensive everywhere after the 1850s or so compared to OTL. With higher food prices, landowners and greater farmers will prosper, urban workers will have lower disposable incomes (and unskilled workers with their low wages will be even more malnourished than OTL), and aristocracy will be economically and politically stronger everywhere (even in Eastern Europe, where they were strong enough already in OTL). OTOH, it will stimulate improvements in agricultural productivity (for instance, artificial fertilizers may come earlier and spread faster, because European agrarian interests will have more money to spend). Such improvements, if they come early enough, will partly cancel harmful effects of lower American grain supplies.
Thank you, I was wondering that
 
With American grain exports greatly diminished, food will be more expensive everywhere after the 1850s or so compared to OTL. With higher food prices, landowners and greater farmers will prosper, urban workers will have lower disposable incomes (and unskilled workers with their low wages will be even more malnourished than OTL), and aristocracy will be economically and politically stronger everywhere (even in Eastern Europe, where they were strong enough already in OTL). OTOH, it will stimulate improvements in agricultural productivity (for instance, artificial fertilizers may come earlier and spread faster, because European agrarian interests will have more money to spend). Such improvements, if they come early enough, will partly cancel harmful effects of lower American grain supplies.

Wouldn't that also encourage the spread of agriculture into more marginal areas (particularly in Siberia, Argentina, etc.)? Russian Empire will be much wealthier, no doubt.
 
Wouldn't that also encourage the spread of agriculture into more marginal areas (particularly in Siberia, Argentina, etc.)? Russian Empire will be much wealthier, no doubt.
Yes on both counts. Speaking of Russia, it will have more prosperous agriculture and even less of modern industry (workers' wages were low enough OTL, but here, with higher food prices and higher rural wages at harvest-time, urban jobs will be far less attractive for migrants from countryside). Likely political ramifications of this situation include stronger nobility, more stable government finances, and weaker Socialist movement.

Also, it will encourage earlier attempts at mechanization in the Great Plains (steam ploughs, possibly steam harvesters ITTL, etc.). These attempts failed OTL because horses and oxen were cheaper and available everywhere in the temperate belt. Here, though, there will be large horse- and oxen-less portions of the prime temperate farmland, and it will push people into trying to use inanimate power there.
 
Yes on both counts. Speaking of Russia, it will have more prosperous agriculture and even less of modern industry (workers' wages were low enough OTL, but here, with higher food prices and higher rural wages at harvest-time, urban jobs will be far less attractive for migrants from countryside). Likely political ramifications of this situation include stronger nobility, more stable government finances, and weaker Socialist movement.

Also, it will encourage earlier attempts at mechanization in the Great Plains (steam ploughs, possibly steam harvesters ITTL, etc.). These attempts failed OTL because horses and oxen were cheaper and available everywhere in the temperate belt. Here, though, there will be large horse- and oxen-less portions of the prime temperate farmland, and it will push people into trying to use inanimate power there.
wow so the US and Russia switch places? Also the possibility of there being no USSR. I would also expect that there would be a larger population as well.
 
wow so the US and Russia switch places? Also the possibility of there being no USSR. I would also expect that there would be a larger population as well.
The US will stay far more prosperous than Russia, it will be just somewhat less prosperous than OTL (and the whole world will be worse for that). As for the possible earlier mechanization of agriculture in the US, it will be nothing like the Soviet collectivization and mechanization drive of the 1930s (there will be no collective farms, no government diktat, no extortionate taxation of agriculture, and, of course, no man-made famines).

Higher food prices will likely depress population growth (poorer peasants were grain buyers, not grain sellers, and many poorer rural households relied on their males' urban jobs, which will pay less in real terms ITTL). Also, higher global food prices will encourage increased grain exports from Russia, which may well diminish grain supplies for domestic consumption, especially for poorer consumers (of course, higher prices also mean higher production, but it is not clear whether higher export supplies will be obtained only from higher production, or from part of what was domestic supplies OTL as well).
 
The US will stay far more prosperous than Russia, it will be just somewhat less prosperous than OTL (and the whole world will be worse for that). As for the possible earlier mechanization of agriculture in the US, it will be nothing like the Soviet collectivization and mechanization drive of the 1930s (there will be no collective farms, no government diktat, no extortionate taxation of agriculture, and, of course, no man-made famines).

Higher food prices will likely depress population growth (poorer peasants were grain buyers, not grain sellers, and many poorer rural households relied on their males' urban jobs, which will pay less in real terms ITTL). Also, higher global food prices will encourage increased grain exports from Russia, which may well diminish grain supplies for domestic consumption, especially for poorer consumers (of course, higher prices also mean higher production, but it is not clear whether higher export supplies will be obtained only from higher production, or from part of what was domestic supplies OTL as well).
So not a good thing over all, and you have the possibility of the USSR still existing. nuts.
 
Top