I've made a simplified version of my notes on ethics and environment-related arguments against veganism as a part two to my health-related arguments against veganism
post for an assessment! Other argument ideas, peer-reviewed sources and general advice are appreciated!
‘We are superior to animals/animals aren’t as intelligent as us/animals don’t understand morals.’
While we may be slightly smarter than animals form other species we are not 'superior' to animals- we can't swim or see in the dark or fly as well as other animals can, so we aren't superior in that regard. The intelligence level of animals is also no justification for exploiting and killing them, especially for livestock such as chickens, cows, pigs, and sheep which we know feel pain and are reasonably intelligent when it comes to understanding their surroundings and what is happening to and around them. Animals are sentient beings- you cannot justify hurting them because they don't have the same level of intelligence as us. It also isn't justifiable to state that animals don't appear to have a sense of morals- as the 'superior' species with an understanding of right and wrong we should be more sophisticated when it comes to the treatment of other animals. Just because an infant may not understand that assault or murder is wrong does not mean that we're allowed to assault or murder an infant- so why should our treatment be any different towards other species.
‘The animal is already dead/I don’t waste the animal/veganism doesn’t make a difference.’
- The animal that is being eaten is already dead, yet the money used to purchase that animal product is being used by an industry to continue exploiting and killed more animals. You can use or waste animal products that you've purchased, but that doesn't matter to the dead animal- it just wanted to live and not be subjected to suffering, like all sentient living beings, and like the sentient beings that are being exploited by animal-based products. Going vegan means you won't contribute to an increased demand for animal products and will instead be helping contribute to the increasing demand for plant-based products that will create new job opportunities within those industries- so veganism does indeed make a difference.
‘It’s impossible to be 100% vegan/the whole world will never go vegan/there are more important things, like human right issues.’
- While it may be impossible to be 100% cruelty-free, due to things such as animal testing for certain products, there are always steps people can take to lessen their impact and become more cruelty-free. It's better to be 90% cruelty-free rather than 10% cruelty-free. And yes, it’s unlikely the whole world will go completely vegan, yet the same can be said for things such as racism, homophobia, and sexism. Trying to justify being racist, sexist, or homophobic by saying that the whole world currently isn’t against racism, sexism or homophobia right now and may not ever be is illogical, and so is using the same argument for not going vegan. It’s not a difficult request to transition into veganism even though more ‘important things’ are going on globally at present- you can still be vegan and actively participate in finding solutions for human right issues. In several ways, veganism does connect to human rights- slaughterhouse workers often suffer psychological damage from their work, and they are human, for instance.
‘The dairy industry doesn’t harm animals/cows need to be milked.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3
- Cows lactate, or produce milk, because they are mothers like all other mammals- humans included. Cows are forcibly artificially inseminated, whether they are in a free-range or a factory farm. If the calf born is male, the calf will be killed immediately due to not being able to produce milk and thus not being profitable to the dairy industry, or sold to the beef or veal industry where they may live a little longer in a state of malnutrition before they are killed. Calves that are female follow their mother's fate- being forcibly impregnated, having her milk taken from her, and having to give birth to calves which will be abused and killed too. Dairy cows are killed at the age of 4 to 5 years, while their natural lifespan is roughly 25 years, due to their bodies being damaged from constantly being impregnated and lactating with no time to recover which results in a decline in milk production and a decline in profit for the farm. It’s also worth noting that calves are typically separated from their mothers within 48 hours of birth, with both the mother and her calf suffering and stressed as a result of this. Cows are aware of what is happening to them, making this not only physical but emotional abuse that the cows must endure until they are slaughtered once they aren’t as profitable. Many studies have shown that cows are capable of feeling pain, anxiety and stress, alongside being very intelligent creatures that have long term memory and the ability to recognize individual faces of other cows as well as learn. They have distinct and different personalities from other cows as well, like other mammals- humans included. It is also a misconception that cows do not 'need to be milked'- the only reason why they require milking is because of the absence of their calf that would otherwise be drinking the milk designed for them, not humans.
‘The egg industry doesn’t harm animals.’
- While it is true that chickens do not need to be killed during egg production this does not mean that the egg industry doesn't kill animals. As only females produce eggs, day-old chicks are killed by either being drowned, suffocated, gassed or ground to death simply because they are male. The amount of eggs that chickens produce is unnatural, too- while a wild chicken may lay 10 to 20 eggs in a year domesticated chickens will produce over 800 eggs a year as a result of genetic manipulation. Egg production will decline after the age of 18 months, which is when hens will be slaughtered- despite having a lifespan of up to 8 years. Chickens are not 'dumb'- they exhibit many behaviours shared by animals the majority of humans perceive as highly intelligent, such as self-awareness, self-control, complex methods of communicating, empathy, complex negative and positive emotions, distinct personalities, and the ability to anticipate future events- and they can certainly feel pain.
‘The silk industry doesn’t harm animals.’
- While 'ethical' silk does exist, the majority of conventional silk is produced by boiling silkmoths that are within their cocoons alive or by stabbing them with needles. This is because silkmoths would chew through their cocoon, which wouldn't result in a single strand of silk and thus be unprofitable for silk farmers.
‘The wool industry doesn’t harm animals.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3 4
- Mulesing, the practice which involves removing pieces of skin in an attempt to prevent certain infections like flystrike, is done in many areas without any pain relief. While some countries, such as New Zealand, have made mulesing illegal due to cruelty tail docking is still considered legal. Tail docking is the removal of the tail of sheep, as lambs are born with long tails but are removed when the lambs are less than 6 months of age by cutting the tails off or using a rubber ring that will tighten around the tail and cause it to eventually wither and drop off. Tail docking is also done without any pain relief. While sheep do need to be sheared, this is a result of selective breeding and genetic manipulation that requires sheep to be dependent on farmers because of their excessive wool growth. It isn't natural or healthy for the sheep. It is also worth noting that many sheep are shorn in early spring before sheep can shed their winter coats to prevent a loss of wool and profit for the farmer, which results in an estimated one million sheep dying due to exposure to cold temperatures. Sheep are also slaughtered once wool production begins to decline. Like all animals used for livestock, sheep are sentient, intelligent, and emotional creatures that are aware of the pain being dealt to them.
‘The honey industry doesn’t harm animals.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3
- Bees require honey to survive- humans don't. Beekeepers often replace the honey harvested with a sugar substitute that lacks essential micro-nutrients which bees receive from honey, and alongside selective inbreeding, honey bees are often in a weak, unhealthy and vulnerable state. The diseases that honey bees get due to their vulnerability are then spread to native pollinators, negatively affecting the impact of native pollinators and the surrounding environment. Honey farming is not beneficial to the bees, nor the environment. Bees shouldn't be subjected to this, as they are not 'dumb'- bees have a level of intelligence which many people may be surprised by and are capable of being taught to gain a reward, teaching other bees what they have learnt and also trying to improve upon what they are being taught.
‘The leather industry doesn’t harm animals.’
[Source/s: 1 2
- Leather is often not a by-product of the beef industry. While it can be if the demand for meat declined fewer animals would be slaughtered and less leather would be at risk of being 'wasted'. Both animals and workers are harmed by the leather industry- the chemicals used to tan leather are toxic to the environment, as well as humans, and people in areas that leather is produced often suffer from birth defects, discolouration, and other deformities due to chemicals leaching into waterways and the ground. Leather requires these chemicals as without it the leather would rot. A substantial amount of greenhouse gases are emitted from the many cattle required to create leather as well. Sometimes leather is not even a by-product, but instead the reason why an animal was bred originally.
‘The fish industry doesn’t harm animals.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3 4
- Due to differing greatly in appearance from companion animals and land mammals such as dogs and cats many people lack compassion for fish, and also believe them to have low levels of intelligence as well as not being able to feel pain. Fish can feel stress, tissue damage, and definitely pain- especially true for farmed fish which are forced to live in over-crowded, cruel conditions. Other animals, such as dolphins, are also often caught as by-catch and are harmed, or even killed, as a result of this.
‘Animals are killed in crop harvesting.’
- Animals, such as rodents and insects, can be killed as a result of crop harvesting, yet there are ways consumers can attempt to avoid these practices by buying from organisations which try to minimise this. It is also important to note there is a difference in intent between buying plant-based foods and animal-based foods- while the money used to purchase plant-based products will go primarily to growing and harvesting crops, not the killing of animals, the money used to purchase animal-based products will go primarily to exploiting and killing animals. Also, seeing that ten times the amount of crops are used to feed animals to create animal-based products when compared to the crops used for human consumption the vegan diet would still be resulting in fewer animal deaths than omnivorous diets.
‘Plants feel pain/plants are living too/fungi and bacteria are living too.’
[Source/s: 1 2
- Plants are not sentient- they do not have a brain or a central nervous system which would allow them to process sensations like pain, and they also do not have any evolutionary purpose for developing pain as they cannot exactly move away from what is causing them pain. This can also be applied to fungi and bacteria, which also do not have brains or central nervous systems. Even if plants, fungi and bacteria did feel pain, eating a vegan diet would lessen the amount of plants that your diet demands as livestock eat ten times the amount of crops that humans eat, so you would still be eating less suffering and 'pain'. It is also worth noting no scientific studies have found plants to be sentient or capable of feeling pain, either.
‘Plants are pollinated by insects.’
- Consuming plant-based products that may have required pollination from insects does not cause that product to 'not be vegan' and to invalidate veganism. Consuming plants which need to be pollinated is more ethical than eating honey as harvesting plants such as fruit does not remove the fruit tree, which is what flowers and provides a food source for pollinators. Harvesting crops from plants such as cucumbers or pumpkins in where the plant dies after it has finished producing 'fruit' also doesn't cause harm for pollinators, as seeds are often sowed to replace the plant and thus also does not cause harm to pollinators.
‘Free-range and organic animal-based products are ethical.’
- Regardless of whether the animal product is labelled as 'free-range' and 'organic', they did not get to live their entire lifespan. They were still slaughtered at a fraction of their natural lifespan. Male chicks are still killed in the egg industry, calves are still taken away from their mothers, and animals are still being used and killed for human benefit. The only real difference between conventional and free-range animal products is that the animal may have had a decent standard of living before being slaughtered, though this isn't always the case either, as farms have been caught labelling themselves as free-range while technically being factory farms.
‘Animals are humanely slaughtered.’
- The term 'humane slaughter' is a perfect example of an oxymoron. While animals can be killed without any pain, though the majority of animals aren't as it is inefficient to do on a large scale, this does not equate to the act of killing an animal being morally right. The Humane Slaughter Association states that if no other methods are immediately available (such as lethal injection, free-bullet firearms, and captive-bolt stunning) then external trauma should be done. They describe this by stating 'Infant lambs, kids and piglets can be humanely killed by delivering a heavy blow to the head. This must only be used if no other method is immediately available. There are two variations of this method: Hold the animal by the back legs and deliver a firm blow to the back of the head with a blunt instrument, e.g. an iron bar or hammer [or] hold the animal by the back legs and swing it through an arc to hit the back of its head with considerable force against a solid object, e.g. a brick wall or metal stanchion. With both methods, it is essential that the blow is delivered swiftly, firmly and with absolute determination. If there is any doubt that the animal has not been killed effectively, the blow should be immediately repeated. Death should be ensured by bleeding the animal by cutting the throat from ear to ear to sever both carotid arteries and both jugular veins. An alternative method is to insert the knife into the base of the neck towards the entrance of the chest to sever all the major blood vessels where they emerge from the heart'. Humane means to show compassion or to do good, and the previously described method of 'humane slaughter' was nowhere near compassionate- you cannot 'compassionately' kill someone that does not want to die.
‘Veganism is unsustainable.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
- A quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to global warming is from food production, and more than half of those emissions are from animal-based food production. Even 'climate-friendly' animal meat products produce more greenhouse gases than plant-based protein sources. Cutting out animal products from an individual's diet can reduce their carbon footprint solely from food production by two thirds. This is quite extraordinary, seeing that animal products only make up a fifth of all food products consumed by a single person on average. Free-range, organic, local livestock is not better for the environment either, seeing as more land is required and as grain is easier to digest for cows than grass grass-fed cows emit more greenhouse gases. It is more environmentally friendly for someone to consume a plant-based product that was shipped rather than a locally made animal product, as greenhouse gas emissions that are created due to transportation only makes up 6% of the footprint from food production. Certain plant products, such as soy, have been said to be unsustainable as they are destroying the Amazon. The issue with this argument is that over 96% of soy from the Amazon is being used to feed livestock, so stopped the consumption of livestock would be environmentally friendly in comparison to stopping the consumption of soy products. Avocado is another food which has been deemed unsustainable, however, they only generate a fraction of greenhouse emissions when compared to animal products. And while consumption of conventional, unethically source palm oil which contributes to deforestation should be stopped, sustainably sourced palm oil is an option and is more sustainable than other oil crops as palm oil production requires less land.
‘Livestock would overpopulate/livestock will go extinct/livestock will be killed in the wild/livestock wouldn’t exist without humans.’
- Livestock would not overpopulate if we stopped consuming them, as they are usually artificially inseminated by humans and overbred by humans the majority of the time. They also wouldn't go extinct necessarily if we stopped breeding them, as we could keep them and conserve them in sanctuaries. Livestock also wouldn't have to be released into the wild, as the whole world won't be going vegan overnight and the population of livestock is likely to decrease slowly into a more manageable amount that can be kept in sanctuaries. Trying to use the argument that 'livestock wouldn't exist if humans didn't breed them' against veganism is also rather illogical to try and justify eating them, as the same argument could be applied to dogs bred to be eaten or to participate in dog fights- this doesn’t make eating dogs or making dogs fight suddenly moral simply because they were breed for that sole purpose.
‘Animal testing is needed for medication/humans have to take medication tested on animals to know it is safe.’
[Source/s: 1 2
- We do not need to test on animals to find out if a product, such as medication, is safe for human use. It has been found multiple times that animal testing is an unreliable way to find if products are safe, as they are uniquely different from humans. Other methods, such as using actual human cells and tissues, are being developed to show if products are safe for human use, and most likely would be more efficient at discovering if the product is safe or beneficial in humans. While some people in certain areas, such as the United States, have to take medication that has been tested on animals as the law requires animal testing this is not unethical as they cannot avoid it and purchasing medication does not increase the demand for animal testing as animal testing for that product has already occurred.
‘If everyone went vegan people would lose their jobs.’
- While people may end up losing their jobs if the world went vegan there would be more job opportunities due to the increased demand in all sorts of plant-based products. It's estimated that roughly 19 million job opportunities will be created if people began eating a plant-based diet, according to one study. This loss of jobs and an increase of job opportunities will be gradual, though, so the world will have time to adapt to the changing situation.
‘You can’t be vegan and have pets/pets cannot be vegan.’
[Source/s: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
- You can be vegan and still own pets adopting is the most ethical option. Dogs and cats have also been shown, countless times, to be healthy and capable of living on a nutritionally adequate vegan diet, and may even benefit as allergies towards meat and dairy are not uncommon within felines and canines. Dogs can digest starch very well, while calories from plants can be made digestible for cats and micronutrients which are synthetic can also prevent certain nutrient deficiencies in cats. The fact that vegan diets for pets are 'unnatural' is disregarding many common practices such as surgery, vaccines, and conventional kibble which isn't exactly natural, either. Vegan diets for pets are also more environmentally friendly, due to the decreased greenhouse gas emissions and water used to raise animals that are slaughtered for conventional kibble production.
‘You can’t be vegan and religious/God put animals on Earth for us to eat.’
- Veganism is not explicitly prohibited by any religion. Why exactly would a god create animals, give them the ability to feel pain and then be fine with allowing us to cause them pain by harming and killing them when there is another lifestyle, such as veganism, which causes the least amount of destruction and harm to the environment, the animals, and humans, which are all notably the creations of good?
‘Animal-based products, such as wool, leather, fur, and silk are more sustainable than synthetic ‘vegan’ materials like polyester.’
- While wool, leather, fur and silk are biodegradable and materials like polyester are not this does not make animal-based products ‘sustainable’. The most sustainable choice is to buy second-hand, as the item already exists and paying for it does not cause an increase in demand which will require more resources to be created for that piece of clothing. Buying second-hand online, at thrift stores or charity stores, are often cheaper, too! For products that may not be suitable for buying second hand, such as underwear, some organisations create clothing from recycled materials that would have otherwise been thrown away, which is sustainable, or from biodegradable plant-based materials such as cotton.
‘Veganism is expensive.’
- A plant-based diet is often cheaper than a conventional omnivore diet as it is made up of cheap staples like potatoes, rice, bread, legumes, and other fruits and vegetables. Many areas around the world, including impoverished regions, survive primarily on a vegan diet as well.
‘Vegan food tastes bad/vegan food is tasteless/animal products taste good.’
- Vegan diets are not 'tasteless' as vegan food does not 'taste bad'. While animal products can be appealing taste-wise, the taste of a product does not make it morally right to contribute to the exploitation and slaughter of other sentient life forms. Many 'vegan foods' are foods that people consume daily as well, and many foods can be veganised as well.
| || | submitted by SBBG to StardewValley
Junimos aren't the most efficient of critters. They don't collect crops on rainy days or during festivals, and sometimes they 'miss' crops in the corners of their collection area. Still, for the low, low price of 20k gold, 200 stone, 100 fiber and 9 starfruit, they can save you a LOT of time.
I wanted to find the most "efficient" junimo hut layout. By "efficient", I specifically mean that I wanted to maximize the number of crops I could fit within the collection area while still having full sprinkler coverage.
Since the junimo hut collection area is 17x17, with an awkward 6 tile block in the middle for the hut itself (and the inability to put anything directly in front of the door of the hut, lest you block the junimos from leaving), this project is not as simple as it might seem at first. A lot of people simply put down 9 iridium sprinklers and use the excess collection space for pathing, breaking up their large fields and making them more accessible to both junimos and for the player, not to mention more aesthetically pleasing. But I wanted to try maximizing collection coverage and still wanted to use every sprinkler space.
After playing with the Stardew Planner, I came up with several designs I'm very happy with. I'd like to share them with you. I think most of them manage to be an excellent compromise between efficient and aesthetic. I've made a couple of small posts about some of these layouts, but this post is designed to bring together all of the examples in one place, along with analysis and commentary. The Minimalist:
The Minimalist with sprinkler coverage highlighted
This is the first design I came up with. The most basic idea is this: place 9 iridium sprinklers in a 3x3 grid, then place quality sprinklers along one vertical and one horizontal axis. This will give you one extra sprinkler coverage space that sits OUTSIDE of the junimo collection area. You can use this to plant flowers, then place lines of beehives next to the flowers.
The Minimalist with Junimo Hut Collection area highlighted: note that the flowers are outside the collection area
Stardew Planner example of The Minimalist: https://stardew.info/planne25-narrow-badgers-whimpered-cordially/
This is a pretty good layout! It has a relatively
small footprint, not too much larger than the junimo coverage itself. We get a total of 262 crop collection squares:
(17x17 crop coverage squares=289, minus 9 iridium sprinklers, minus 11 quality sprinklers, minus 1 deluxe scarecrow and minus 6 junimo hut spaces, for a total of 262 crop collection spaces.)
Just outside of the collection area are 35 flowers, which WON'T be collected by junimos if everything is set up properly. And alongside the flowers are 37 beehives. The placement of the hives means it's easy for the player to collect the honey without picking the flowers accidentally. The total footprint needed is 21x20 when necessary flooring spaces along the outside of the hives is taken into account (since horses need a path two spaces wide when traveling vertically). Minimalist Variation: The "Needs More Honey"
While it's no more efficient in terms of crop collection squares, if you like honey (and who doesn't?) you can more than double the amount of hives around the Minimalist simply by putting another row of them on the other side of the paths and extending some around the edges. Every single one of the hives in this plan should be in range of a flower: \"Needs More Honey!\"
Stardew Planner example of "Needs More Honey": https://stardew.info/planne17-fine-chickens-kissed-jovially/
This variation increases the size of the footprint to 26x24 (though you don't don't need a full line along the bottom or the side for the extra beehives, so it's kind of like 25.3x23.3-ish) The MAXIMALIST
Go big or go home, amirite? 262 crop collection spaces is a lot, but I knew I could do better. And if you can put a line of quality sprinklers along two sides, you can put them along four sides. I give you *drumroll, please*:
THE MAXIMALIST (x2): The MAXIMALIST (x2) with sprinkler coverage highlighted
Stardew Valley Planner link: https://stardew.info/planne9-free-squirrels-fought-jovially/
Wow, look at all those crop collection squares! There are 273 crop collection squares around the hut on the left (272 around the hut on the right):
17x17 crop collection squares=289, minus 10 iridium sprinklers, minus 6 junimo hut spaces, for a total of 273! 11 more than the minimalist! The MAXIMALIST with Junimo Hut collection area highlighted
A couple of notes on this layout: if you block the door of a junimo hut, the junimos won't come out and collect anything (or so says the wiki). Therefore we have to move the center sprinkler down by one space and add an extra sprinkler above the hut. This leads to some sprinkler overlap, which hurts my soul, but which is unfortunately unavoidable if you want as many crop collection squares as possible. If you don't want the overlap, you can also pave around the junimo hut, which will reduce the amount of crop collection spaces but might make the actual collection process a little more reliable (and some might find it more aesthetically pleasing).
The two layouts in the example planner differ slightly in that one utilizes four regular scarecrows, strategically placed in the flowers surrounding the crop collection area, while one just lazily sticks a deluxe scarecrow in the middle, sacrificing a single crop collection space (for a total of 272 instead of 273). If you turn on scarecrow overlays, you'll see what I mean: The MAXIMALIST with different scarecrow coverage options highlighted
You'll need 80 flower seeds for the outer ring and 48 flower seeds for the inner ring (per junimo hut). If you lay out the MAXIMALIST as in the planner link above, you'll need 160 beehives per junimo hut. That's a lot of coal, wood, maple syrup, and iron!
(If you want to lay out your farm with two junimo huts as in the example, you'll need to double the crop, flower, and beehive numbers.)
There are some advantages to the MAXIMALIST. Yes, it maximizes crop collection squares, but beyond that it also increases the chance of getting a giant melon, cauliflower or pumpkin, since it maximizes 3x3 squares. However, if you're going for a giant crop, I recommend turning off collection (you can do it at the hut itself) and leaving the fully grown crops in the field for awhile. If your crops are all picked right away, the chance of getting a giant one is lessened. The MAXIMALIST with no highlights...look at all those 3x3 crop spaces!
Another advantage to the MAXIMALIST: plant the outer ring of flowers with poppies in summer and fairy roses in fall, but for the inner ring of flowers plant sunflowers in summer and leave them to grow through fall (be careful not to pick them when you're harvesting your poppies). This will allow you to get a couple of harvests of sunflower honey in early fall when your fairy roses are still growing. Once your fairy roses are grown, your honey harvests will become Fairy Rose honey.
The MAXIMALIST has a huge footprint, and will only work on certain farms. You'll need at least a 29x27 space (the version I created uses two rows for the horizontal pathing, but you technically only need one). In the example above, each of the two huts requires a 30x30 block, including the cobblestone borders.
If I were going to do this layout all over again, I would move everything one square to the left, to make a narrow path past the pond on the right side of the map. But there's no way I'm moving all those beehives and all that pathing. ^_^;
When I came up with this concept, I went back to my very first save file and completely ripped apart my farm to try it out. This is the result: Maximalist Proof of Concept
I'm still working on the top part of the map, but I've ALMOST got the farm the way I want it, aesthetically speaking. Eventually I'll post the final version to FarmsofStardewValley
. (ETA here's the almost-final version
!) This was all done from one Winter in year five through Summer in year six (it's amazing what you can do when you have tons of cash). The Hybrid
But wait! There's more!
I love the MAXIMALIST, but I also love the Four Corners Farm layout, and the Maximalist is Just. Too. BIG. I also found the Needs More Honey variation to be kind of ugly and unfinished looking, what with the straggling beehives along the side and bottom.
For a compromise between efficiency, size, and aestheticism, I give you:
The Hybrid with sprinkler coverage highlighted
Stardew Valley Planner link: https://stardew.info/planne30-strong-crabs-whimpered-jovially/
A thing of beauty is a joy forever.
I love this plan. I love the way the beehives at the bottom shape around the lake, but still are within flower coverage. I love how balanced, yet accessible it is. I love that it doesn't take over the map the way the MAXIMALIST does (though to be fair, having TWO MAXIMALISTS is part of what made my example so extreme). I love that there's no sprinkler overlap necessary. I love that I can still do the inneouter line of sunflowers and poppies/fairy roses and have the sunflowers affect most (though not all) of the beehives. I love that the deluxe scarecrows can be placed such that they don't interfere with normal movement or honey collection, without sacrificing any crop or flower spaces.
The Hybrid has fewer crop collection spaces than the MAXIMALIST, but more than the Minimalist:
17*17=289, minus 9 iridium sprinklers, minus 5 quality sprinklers, minus 6 junimo hut spaces=269 crop collection spaces.
One very important note: With the Hybrid, if you want the horizontal line of flowers to be along the top, place your quality sprinklers along the bottom. If you want your horizontal line of flowers to be along the bottom, place your quality sprinklers along the top. This avoids the "sprinkler blocking the junimo hut door" issue. The Hybrid Year Two Variation: The Speedrun
I recently did a speedrun of the first year (with the help of this excellent guide in spring, though I wasn't able to complete some of the targets until summer: https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/pc/701094-stardew-valley/faqs/74654
). I completed the community center by early winter (once I'd completed everything else, I used one small exploit to get a single pack of red cabbage seeds, which I then grew in the greenhouse) and got a junimo hut by Spring 1, Year 2.
The problem with a speedrun is iridium. Once Year Two was over I knew I would have steady access to iridium. Or I could go down to the Skull Cavern, but I hate mining and I hate combat. I could buy iridium sprinklers from Krobus, but only one at a time, only on Fridays, and only at a cost of 10k gold apiece (honestly, I'd forgotten this was an option!) So going into year 2 all I had was a ton of quality sprinklers, and no iridium sprinklers.
No problem! Any one of these plans can be converted to a quality sprinkler-only plan!
WHAT? It's true! The 3x3 grid of iridium sprinklers can easily be turned into a 5x5 grid of quality sprinklers.
The Hybrid with all quality sprinklers and regular scarecrows. Until you start getting iridium sprinklers, you will have some sprinkler coverage overlap *sigh*
Stardew Valley Planner link: The Hybrid with quality sprinklers and regular scarecrows: https://stardew.info/planne7-quiet-kingfishers-cuddled-easily/
I don't have enough ancient fruit seeds to fill a field yet, but I was lucky enough to get a coffee bean in year one and was able to raise some in the greenhouse over the winter. Coffee is a great second choice after ancient fruit, because coffee lasts through spring and summer, so you only have to re-plant in fall. It also grows quickly and fruits every other day, which makes it a very good choice for using in conjunction with a junimo hut! It dies in fall, leaving the field hoed and watered, and all you have to do is scythe it away and plant your seeds.
For the Speedrun, you'll need 251 crop seeds, 57 flower seeds for the outer sides and top (less any spaces used for scarecrows, like the one in the example), and 20 flower seeds for the inner sides (less any spaces used for scarecrows, like the two in the example).
(17*18=289, minus 30 quality sprinklers, minus 6 junimo hut spaces, minus 2 spaces not covered by the shifted sprinkler in the middle (one of the two can be used for a scarecrow, as in the example above).
Here's a proof of concept of the Speedrun: The Speedrun Proof of Concept.
It's still a work in progress, obviously, but I like it so far!
I don't have the resources for enough beehives yet (#$%*& coal), so I've used stepping stones to represent where they'll go. Whenever I build more hives, I just place them directly on top of the stepping stones. Sharp-eyed readers will note that I did replace one of the sprinklers with an iridium sprinkler in preparation for shifting the setup, and that I moved the scarecrow to the bottom when I did so. General Tips:
- Place flooring tiles under sprinklers to keep the sprinklers from being dislodged when you use the hoe. Place flooring tiles under beehives to prevent them from getting damaged by spreading weeds, etc.
- Do not turn flower honey into mead. In almost every case, flower honey is worth more than mead. YOU WILL LOSE MONEY IF YOU TURN FLOWER HONEY INTO MEAD. (Wild Honey and Tulip Honey are worth less than mead, Blue Jazz Honey is worth the exact same amount as mead but takes less work, and all the other flower honey types are worth more.) Do not be like the poor guy who put his whole Fairy Rose Honey harvest into kegs.
- I like to plant Winter Seeds in the last few days of winter. You can grow some forageables from them in early winter, then craft a bunch of seeds (this is more efficient than using the seed maker!) to cover your field (remember, you'll want to cover flower spaces, not just crop spaces!) If you plant them late enough but before Winter 28, the plants will die on Spring 1, leaving the ground hoed and watered (though not fertilized). As with coffee plants in fall, the old plants are quickly and easily removed with a scythe, leaving you a nice field ready to plant!
I hope you've enjoyed this analysis! (Remember, you can't spell "analysis" without...nevermind.) If you find any errors, especially with the number of crop/floweetc seeds needed, PLEASE comment and let me know! I am not infallible.
Feel free to leave comments and thoughts about any of these layouts, as well as variation ideas of your own! And if you decide to try out any of these layouts for your own farm, it would make me so, so happy if you would leave a comment and tell me about it. :) I would also love it if you'd tag me on any screenshots you put up using these layouts. Stardew Valley farms are my happy place!