I'm still trying to figure out:
1. How that was relevant to the point I was making about guerrilla warfare and partisan rangers on Arkansas?
2. Why all those windmills in Kansas that were used for supplying water for livestock, etc, according to you weren't used for that but were in Texas? (They were also used to supply water to locomotives in Kansas.)
3. Why Kansas was being used to ship cattle from Texas if it didn't have signficant rail expansion. Double the trackage in Texas? Considering how much greater the distances are it sounds like Texas was in essence keeping up (despite having been established decades sooner.) I spent 14 years working in Texas so I do appreciate the distances involved as well as the great variations in climate in its various regions.
I'm not a railroad or ag historian but Kansas was a newer state and building out. I still don't get any idea of where you are going with this. Texas was a frontier state and expanded as expected allowing for lack of new arrivals during the war. Kansas and other frontier states also grew out rapidly.
Arkansas was a frontier state but it seems to have suffered disproportionately in the Civil War. Guerrilla warfare and counter-guerrilla warfare seem to have really played it out for a decade. The numbers are what they are. They do support what Arkansas inhabitants said about the overall impact of guerrilla war (blaming both sides.)
The thing that surprised me is that Missouri did not suffer a dramatic immediate postwar effect from the guerrilla warfare. I need to go back and look at the Missouri counties again, since I think some suffered substantially on a relative basis, although not absolute.