A method of analysis of range possibilities for submarginal crop land in Montana
by Layton S Thompson
A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate Committee In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the
Degree of Master of Science In Agricultural Economics
Montana State University
© Copyright by Layton S Thompson (1940)
Abstract:
The object of this study is to develop a method of analysis for use in determining the economic
feasibility of artificial revegetation on submarginal crop land in different areas in Montana. The
procedure includes a study of certain economic aspects of submarginal crop land, an analysis of the
costs of grass seeding and the value of pasture so established, and a demonstration by use of a model
case of the steps which should be used in determining the feasibility of a seeding project. It is hoped in
this way to establish a basis on which to bring together the work of the technician and the economist in
order to solve some land use problems in a practical way. In brief, the method of analysis which is
advocated involves the computation of the expected yearly per acre return from the proposed project
and the yearly per ac cost of the investment in establishing the pasture plus per acre cost of utilising the
pasture. By subtracting these costs from the value computed, the land charge which the project will
carry may be computed.
Such an approach nay point the way to necessary adjustments in land tenure or in land charges (taxes
and interest on investment.) The study indicates that further work needs to be done on the correlation
between yield of crested wheatgrass and climate and soil type and condition. There is also a wide field
open for investigation concerning the value of social incomes from grass cover, and another concerning
the pecuniary value of created wheatgrass which is due to the special role it plays in the ranch
management plan. A METHOD OF ANALYSIS OF RANGE POSSIBILITIES
FOR SUEEdARGINAL CROP LAND IN MONTANA
.by
Layton S. Thoapeon
A THESIS
Submitted to the Graduate Coiaalttee
in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
Master of Science in Agricultural Economics
at
Montana State College
In Charge o:
Chairman
Bozeman, Montana
June, 1940
T 37Sn
c
T
xj
TABLE OF CONTENTS
rs!
S
4
List of Illustrations....................................... .
5
Abstract.... ................................. .......... .
6
Introduction..................................................
8
The Problems of Submrglnal Crop Land in Montana.....
8
Definition of SubmargineJL Crop Land....... ...........
11
ObjectiTee of the Study...............................
18
Method......... ........................................
19
Source of Data............... ........... .............
20
Analysis of Pasture Value.................................... .
Tlhat Shall be Done with Suhaarginal Crop Land?.......
£2
22
Perennial Gr&es the Natural Climax Vegetation..
22
Natural Re vegetation,............. .............
22
Non Pecuniary Value of Grass.......... ...... .
23
Pasture for Livestock the Primary Consideration
27
How Value of Pasture Land is Determined...... .
27
'40
- GrAad
t)
28
9
Greeted Tfheatgrase...................... .......... .
S
1
List of Tables.................. .................... .
History of Use In Montana end Present Trend....
28
Natural Characteristics of Greeted TJieatgraee..
31
Its Role In the Ranch Management Plan.... .
32
Comparison with Other Grasses (Productivity)...
55
Value of an Animal Month of Forage.............
41
64111
-SA n a l y B of Couts of Artificial Reseeding........................ ......45
Seed.....................
45
Seeding Operations..... ................
46
Allowance for Risk...............
48
The Time Element.......................
52
Fencing, Water Development, and Other Improvements.............. 56
A Model Case, Using Valley County Datt............ .................... 59
Description of Area..*........
59
Physical Characteristics.... ..................
59
Soils..............
80
Climate....... ........... . . . . .. .... ...... . .. ....... 64
Land Classification and Use............................... 65
A Model Case...................... ....... .................. .
68
Value...............
68
Corte .............
74
Private Ownership................... ...;........
74
Public Ownership...............................
78
Summary and Recommendations for Further Study..........................
80
Summary.........
SO
Recommendations for Further Study..... ................. .
81
Acknowledgments.......
83
Bibliography..................
84
Appendices.................
89
LIET OF TABLES
Table I.
County Oivned Land In Montana for the Ieare 1925, 1950, 1954,
1957.
Table II.
Occurrence of Native Species on Varloue Types of Land in
Wheatland County, Montana, 1955.
Table III.
Acres of Crested Wheatgraee on Farm Land in 59 Montane Counties,
1955 and 1959.
Table IV.
Yield of Different Types of Pasture and Precipitation at
Moccasin Station, 1954 to 1959.
Table V.
Relation of Precipitation to Comparative Yield of Greeted
Wheatgrase and Native Range at Moccasin Station, 1954 to 1959.
Table VI.
Method Used for Cowing Crested Iheetgrass. Saaple Taken in
Valley, Fallon, ;nd Toole Counties for Years 1955 to 1959.
Table VII.
Success in Establishing Stand of Crested Wheatgrass by Differ­
ent Methods of Soving in Three Counties, 1955 to 1959.
Table VIII.
Time Required for Crested Wheatgraes to Come Up on Successful
Eeedings.
Table IX.
Valley County Land Use, 1958.
Table X.
Land Classified as to Ownership, Valley County Cooperative
Grazing Districts, 1926.
Table XI.
Assessed Value and Tax Levied in Valley County by Grade of
Land, 1928 to 1952.
w 5-»
LIST OF ILLUSTRATION!:
Figure 1.
Net Change in Amount of Crop Ltmd in Monttn& Counties from
1929 to 1954. Includes Crops Harvested, Crops Failure, end
Idle or Fallov Land.
Figure 2.
Return Required to Entice Land from One Use to Another.
Figure S,
Yield of Crested Vheatgraes Pasture and Native Grass Pasture
at the Moccasin Station, 1954 to 1959. Measured in Pounds
per Acre Gained by Livestock.
Figure 4.
Yield of Crested Vheatgrass Pasture and Native Grass Pasture
at the Moccasin Station, 1954 to 1989. Measured in Animal
Days Carrying Capacity per Acre.
Figure 5.
Comparison of Production of Crested Vheetgrass (Livestock
Gains per Acre) with Production of Native Grass in Relation
to Rainfall at Moccasin station, 1954 to 1959.
Figure 6.
Soils of Valley County.
Figure 7.
Amount of Plowed Land (Abandoned Land and Crop Land) by Tornships in the Valley County Area Covered by the Vestern Range
Surv y, 1927.
Figure 8.
Amount of Abandoned Land by Townships in the Valley County
Area Covered by the Western Range Survey, 1927.
Figure 9.
Comparative Grazing Capacity by Townships in the Valley County
Area Covered by the Western Range Survey, 1957.
Figure 10.
Land Use on Valley County Area Used for Model Case.
G-
A. MBTIIOD OF AlIALYSIS OF EAIIOE POSSIBILITIES
FOR SBBiEAEGIIIAL CROP LASD IK MOHTAHA
ABSTRACT
The object of this study is to develop & method of analysis for
us© in d e t e mlnine the econonic feasibility of artificial revorotation
on sutenarclml crop land in different areas in !Montana. Tlie procedure
Includes & study of certain econonic aspects of eubrnrcinal crop land,
an analysis of the costs of grass seeding and the value of pasture so
established, and a demonstration by use of a model case of the steps
sdilch should be used in determining the feasibility of a seoding pro­
ject, It is hoped in this vmy to establish a basis on which to bring
together the work of the technician and the economist in order to solve
some land use problems in a practical way. In brief, the method of
analysis which is advocated involves the computation of the expected
yearly per acre return from the proposed project and the yearly per acre
cost of the investment in establishing the pasture plus per acre cost of
utilising the pasture. By subtracting these costs from the value com­
puted, the land charge which the project will carry nay be computed.
Such an approach may point the way to necessary adjustments in land ten­
ure or in land charges (taxes and interest on investment,) The study
indicates that further work needs to be done on the correlation between
yield of crested wlmat grass and el irate and soil type and condition.
There is also a wide field open for investigation concerning the value
of social incomes from grass cover, and another concerning the pecuniary
value of crested wheat-grass w h ich is due to the special role it plays in
the ranch management plan.
"Grass is the forgiveness of Nature - her constant benediction.
Fields trampled with battle, saturated with blood, t o m with the ruts
of cannon, grow green again with grass, and carnage is forgotten.
abandoned by traffic become
erated.
Streets
grass-grown like rural lanes, and are oblit­
Forests decay, harvests perish, flowers vanish, but grass is im­
mortal.... Its tenacious fibers hold the earth in its place, and prevent
its soluble components from washing into the wasting sea.
It invades the
solitude of deserts, climbs the inaccessible slopes and forbidding pin­
nacles of mountains, modifies climates, and determines the history, char­
acter, and destiny of nations.
vigor and aggression.
!Mobtrusive and patient, it has immortal
Banished from the thoroughfare and the field, it
abides its time to return, and when vigilance Is relaxed, or the dynasty
has perished, it silently resumes the throne from which it has been ex­
pelled, but which it never abdicates.
It bears no blazonry of bloom to
charm the senses with fragrance or splendor, but its homely hue is more
enchanting than the lily or the rose.
It yields no fruit in earth or air,
and yet should its harvest fail for a single year, famine would depopulate
the world."*
♦Ingalls, John James, "Blue Grass".
INTRODUCTION
-f
The Problenus of Dubn^r^lnr l Crop Lana in Montana
One of the problems with which we are confronted in relation to
Montana's resources is to find that means of utilizing submarginal crop
land which is at the ease time most feasible and most beneficial.
During '
the period from 1909 to 1919, when the majority of the dry land farming
areas in Montama was being settled,* a large acreage of Monttna land was
brought under the plow.
Exceptional yields due to the fertility of the
newly plowed sod-land and better then average rainfall, good prices due
to the World War, and an increased use of power machinery resulted in the
plowing of several million acres of range land which later proved unsuit­
able for farming.
Much of this land has been abandoned and presents not
only a problem of unused resources but also one of eocicI and economic
maladjustment.
The role of land planning is to make the best use
2
of the
land and to minimize the effects of the maladjustment.
In order to indicate something of the scope of the submarginal land
problem in Montana, an outline of past changes and probable changes in land
use is herewith presented.
According to the census of agriculture, there
was a net decrease in crop Iand^ in £8 counties during the period 1929 to
Ie
2.
5,
Johnson, Neil If., and Eaunderson, $1. H., Types of Farming in Montana.
Bui. 528, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, October, 1956.
Best xise in the economic sense. It will be seen &e the discussion
progresses that "best use" may mean no use, or that from the stand­
point of society it may mean a use which will pay to the individual
entrepreneur less than the cost.
Including crops harvested, crops failure, and idle or fallow land.
1924 of 924,185 acres.
This figure does not account for eny new lend which
was broken during this time which would offset other acres of abandoned
land.
There was probably land abandoned in the 18 counties which show a net
increase in crop land from 1929 to 1924.
(See fig. I)
The state office of
the Agricultural Adjustment Administr. tion estimates the total crop land in
1928 to be approximately the same as the 1925 census figure.'*
In addition
to land abandoned from 1929 to 1924, there were 485,724.6 acres in Montana
in 1928 designated as restoration land ty the Agricultural Adjustment Admin­
istration ,
Montana’s quota for the A. A. A. restoration program, which will
be reached over a period of years, is 875,000 acres.
In 1988 there were
also 1,748,818.5 acres of idle crop land (not including fallow) sithin the
area covered hy A. A. A. contracts.
The area under A. A. A. contracts rep­
resents approximately 90 per cent of Montana's crop land.
Although some of
the land designated as idle crop land is only temporarily idle, it is prob­
ably safe to ssy that a large portion of it is subraarginal for some reason
or other.
Using these data as a basis for estimate, it seems probable that
well over 2 million acres of land have gone out of production in the 10
years from 1929 to 1929, which means that it has made little progress toward
natural revegetation.
4.
5.
5
Interview with Harold Abel, State Statistician, Agricultural Adjuetnient
Administration, Bozeman, Montana, December 28, 1929.
Only for Petroleum County has there been a western renge survey (1927)
covering the entire county and showing detailed land use. It wes found
that 112,716 acres of this county has been plowed. About 25,000 acres
of this land was in crop or fallow in 1928, About 22,000 acres was
designated as idle crop land. This means that about 60,000 acres in
this county have been abandoned, exclusive of that designated as idle
crop land.
'34,339/
I
CROPLAND INCREASED, 1929-1934
FIGURE 1.— NET CHANGE IN AMOUNT OF CROP LAND IN MONTANA COUNTIES FROM 1929 TO 1954
Includes Crops Harvested, Crops Failure, and Idle or Fallow Land*
♦Source of Data:
Census of Agriculture
—11*»
In addition to the eetIme=ted two nillion or more acre; of crop land
abandoned since 1929, there is other eubm&rgimJ. land which is being kept
in cultivation by subsidy of one kind or another, but which may eventir. Ily
be abandoned, and also crop land which had been abandoned before 1929 and
is in various stages of natural revegetation.
According to various esti­
mates, four to five million acres of land which has st some time been
cropped in Montana has been abandoned up to the present time.
6
For our
purpose, it is not necessary to get an exact figure for the amount of submarginal crop land.
Even the lowest estimates are sufficient to indicate
that the correct disposition of this land is one phase of the readjustment
of Montana's agriculture.
Definition of Eubmarainal Crop Lend
A plot of land may appear to be submarginal yet t ctually be marginal
or supramarginal.
Because of this and because of the common confusion in
the popular use of the terms, it is necessary here to define end analyze
them.
From the standpoint of society es a whole, marginal land is lane on
which the return for its utilization Ie just enough to remunerate the out­
lay o$ labor, capital and entrepreneurship incident to its utilization.
In
a discussion of marginal land. Interest on Investment in land as a cost
plays no part, nor does land tax above a m i n i a m tax to defray expenses of
establishing roads and other expenses directly incident to utilizing the
land, for these are items which an individual entrepreneur- pays for the
6.
Hansmeier, M. P., Possibilities of Crested Thcetgrass lor Hesceding
iuontana»s Range Land. B. £. Thesis, Montana Etate College, 192.0, p. 5.
-12right to collect rent froia land, and marginal land protiucee no rent.
Rent
is that part of income which is attributed to the use of land ae & gift of
nature, end we have defined marginal land as that which yields only cost of
utilization.
The term "marginal land" is by definition a relative concept.
There
is a margin of extensive utilization and a margin of intensive utilization.
The intensity of use is defined by the relative amount of capital, labor and
entrepreneurship which is applied.
submarginal for any use.
There is land so unproductive as to be
Pasture in the Great Plains is the least intensive
of all agricultural uses, and land may be eubmarglnal even for pasture for
the simple reason that pasture can be so unproductive that an animal would
use up more energy in grazing the scattered forage then could be gained from
the forage.
Even if the forage were better, the
an,e result would occur if
the cost of improvements necessary to utilize the forage, such as fences,
water development, eradication of poisonous plants, or reseeding, were more
than could be justified by the return.
Etill other land may justify the
application of capital for grazing purposes, or, if physically suitable for
cultivation, may yield a return sufficient to compensate the cost of util­
izing it for cultivated crops.
Only land of certain grades and in certain
sites can be used for truck farming or other very intensive uses.
Hence we
may say that a particular plot of land is marginal for this, that, or the
other use.
That is, there is an extensive margin for each decree of inten­
sive use, a point where it just pays to use land for each particular purpose.
Marginal crop land is, then, that land which returns j ust enough to
pay for using it for crops, and submarginal crop land is land which produces
—
13—
Ieea tlmn enough to pay for eo utilizing it#
There is a difference, however,
between Tmrginal land and land which is rargiral for a particular use#
Land
Tdiich would be intensively used would almost certainly be supramarginal for
sotme use#
For example,
m y land which would be used for crops would proba­
bly yield sene rent as pasture.
drawn into crop use it
rrnuart yield
Consequently, in order that it will be
not only the cost of producing the crop
(labor, capital, and entrepreneurship) but also enough rent to entice it
away from the other use, as illustrated by figure 2#
That is, it rust re­
turn when used for crops not only the production costs but at least as nuch
nor® as the rent which the pasture would produce.
H o t of Lend
Used for Pasture
(Supranarglnal)
T
Anoimt required
to entice land
from pasture
Bent
Cost of raising
corn
return
I
Same Plot Used
for Corn
(Iarrlnal)
Cost of
utilising
pasture
FlGOHE 2e— m m s s REQUIRED TO RBTICS LMIF FEOh
TO AHOTHra
OIB
USE
The aargin for any particular use is determined not alone by position
and productivity due to soil and o l i m t e , but shifts because of other fac­
tors, including price relationships (farm costs and incone), types of farming
-14end farm organization, fanning methods, and capacity of individual farm­
ers.
Obviously, an increased demand for a product .ill cause a rise in
price and extend simultaneously the extensive margin and intensive margin
of cultivation in regard to that particular product.
It should be remem­
bered, however, that land will not shift from its present use to one which
will yield a greater return unless the increased return is at least large
enough to compensate the transference of land to the new use.
Let us nor, consider land from the standpoint of the individual farm­
er.
Then land returns more than enough to remunerate the outlay for labor,
capital and entrepreneurship, B s s m i n fc; fertility to remain unchanged, it
is said to yield economic rent.
gives land value.
It is this ability to yield rent which
The yearly income which is due to rent is capitalized
by the entrepreneur who invests money in the right to collect rent from
land.
If land yielded C 2 per acre above the cost of operation and the pre­
vailing interest cost were five per cent, the value of the land would be
approximately
7.
$2 * .05, or $40 per acre.
To the individual farmer, the
The conventional formula for determining farm value from realty income,
based on the idea of present worth of future income, is
V = £ ♦
,
r
1*2
where "V" is value of land, "a" is annual income, "r" is the rate of
capitalization, and *tw is a straight line annual increase in income
which will continue indefinitely, i.e., to infinity. This formula is
of theoretical value but scarcely practical because it assumes that
"a”, "r" and "i" will remain constant. It is difficult to determine
whether or not, or to what extent soil is being mined, or to forecast
tax policies of governments, or to forecast future interest rates.
The formula assumes that "I" is a straight line annual increase in in­
come which will continue indefinitely, which assumption it might be
difficult to substantiate. It is quite likely that a straight line
decrease would more nearly fit the picture. For a short time valuation
the formula,
Y - L t gives a fairly accurate valuation.
— J.£—
Investment in land is e cost of operation.
If he
pays more than is profit­
able according to normal productivity of hi a land, he any increase hie cost
by overinvestment in land to the extent that the land v.ill eeem to him to
be unsuitable for the use to which he has put it.
This is what happens when
production of abnormally good years is used as a basis for capitalisation
of lend.
A tax on lend amounts to a confiscation of land value.
A tax of fl
per acre on the land which yielded |2 per acre above cost of production re­
duces the income by fl per acre and the value by f20 per acre.
Taxes, like
investment in land, tend to be affected by abnormally good years and, unless
they can be adjusted, may prohibit the use of land which is theoretically
marginal or supramarginal.
This study concerns the disposition of Montana* s subaarginal crop
land.
In land use planning it will be necessary to examine the costs end
returns carefully before classifying the land.
For example. It has already
been indicated that much of Montana’s dry farm land was settled at a time
when prices and yields were »bnorm&lly high, resulting in high capitaliza­
tion of land.
Since interest is a cost to farmers, if and when land cap­
italization can be brought into line with land productivity values, some
land which is now apparently submarginal for crops will be recognized as
marginal or supramarginal from the crop farming standpoint.
Or, again, the tax rate, itself affected by lend utilization, be­
comes more or less fixed and in turn affects the feasibility of land util­
ization.
Table I shows the amount of county owned land in Montana for the
years 1925, 19£0, 1954 and 1957.
This land, a large part of which is
-IE
TABLE I.-— COUNTY OTNED LAND IN MONTANA*
For the Years 1925, 1950, 1954, 1957
Year
Acres
Per Cent of Total
Land Aree
1925
55,985
.06
1950
1,212,579
1.50
1954
2,557,038
2.72
1357
5,548,131
5.59
♦Source*
Renne, R. R., Who Qwas Montana's Lend;. Mlmeo.
Clr. 15, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station,
1959, Table III, p. 18.
abandoned crop land, has become submarginal because of some combination of
the factors listed above and has been taken over by the counties as settle­
ment for delinquent taxes.
In addition, there are over 4,000,000 acres
five or more years delinquent and subject t o tax deed. 89 Some of this de­
linquency probably has been caused by improper distribution of the tax load.
Perhaps some of our apparently submarginal crop land can still be used for
crops by a proper adjustment of the tax load.
An increased demand for farm
crops, causing higher farm prices, would cause submarginal land to become
marginal or supramarginal, although the outlook is not good for any substan­
tial increase in demand for Iiontana farm products.
Land may be marginal or supramarginal for crop use but not appear so
because of the low ability of the man who farms it.
In other words, the
problem may be not submarginal land but a submarginal entrepreneur.
which has
T.nn^
one out of crop production because of this reason may yet be
cropped by a farmer of at least normal ability.
In addition to these maladjustments, the classification of land as
to proper use is made complex by the difficulty of determining what is
normal productivity of land or normal prices.
Although it is not within the scope of this study to attempt to set
up criteria by which to determine whether or not crop land should continue
to be used as crop land,3 it might well be pointed out that from the
8.
9.
Renne, R. R., and Lord, E. H., Ibntana Farm Taxes, Cir. 94, Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station” iWeimn,
Dntana, June, 1938.
Studies of this type have been made, e.g., the followingi "Land rangIng from 12 to 15 bushels are in the doubtful area as far as wheat or
other cereal production is concerned.... Land producing less than 12
— 18”
standpoint o.. general lctnd pluming, whether it be by county governments,
government planning agencies, or farmers, this decision should be made on
the basis of normal costs and normal returns, considering possible adjust­
ments.
Objectives of
Etudv
It is ^ith crop land which, because of conditions of climate and
fcoII* has been -ounti by study or experience to be not productive enough
under normal conditions to pay the costs of farming it, including labor
income sufficient for a family living, that this study is concerned.
This type of land v.ill go back to non-crop pasture land status.
An ad­
justment oi land costs (interest and taxes) will probably be forced.
For
certain grades of this land and under certain cost conditions the beet
disposal of it is to seed it to perennial grasses.
Under certain condi­
tions, too, this may be done under private ownership.
Under other condi­
tions tae returns from this type of Iana will not cover interest on any
investment in lend or any tax load, but from the standpoint of society it
would be good policy for the government to reseed the land or subsidize
its reseeding to conserve resources or avoid a dust hazard.
Finally,
there are probably areas where the better plan would be to let the land
go through the slow process of natural revegetatton (Incxudinb soil build­
ing).
9.
A method of analysis by which to determine the feasibility of9
(Coat'd) bushels to the acre under u summer fallow system may be
definitely regarded as uneconomical uad shifted to some other level
of use. Definite plans should be made to encourage the reseeding of
this type of land to some species of grass v hich is adapted to condi­
tions prevailing in the Great Plains." E. A. Starch in Lend Use
PlannlnM in Montana. Mimeo. Cir., Montana Agricultural Experiment
Station, February, 1954, pp. 5 and 6.
-19re storing submarginal crop land to range by artificial revegetation for dif­
ferent grades of land and under different cost conditions should be of value
to counties having tax delinquent lends to dispose of, to government plan­
ning agencies, or to farmers.
To develop such a method of analysis is the
objective of this study.
Method
Tlie study is designed to be research in technique or method rather
than facts.
The fact Giat a considerable variation exists in climate, soil,
topography and economic conditions which affect the feasibility of artifi­
cial revegetation, makes each small area a separate problem.
It vras neither
possible nor did it seem necessary to obtain detailed information for every
individual plot in the state and classify it as to the economic feasibility
of artificial revegetation.
This project was designed, rather, to determine
the steps through Khich each Individual should go in analyzing his own sit­
uation, using date which apply to his own particular area.
The method used is as follows*
1.
A U data which were available sere c oUected for the state as a
whole to indicate the scope of the problem of submarginal crop
land, variations which exist in factors affecting reseeding, end
trends in the restoration program.
2.
Valley County, which ranks highest in the state in acres of aban­
doned land and idle crop land, and second in number of acres
designated as restoration land by the Agricultural Adjustment
Administration, was chosen as a sample county for more intensive
-ZOEtudy.
Detailed data for this county were obtained end used to
cot up s model case for which to determine the value of artifi­
cially established pasture, cost of establishing this pasture,
and the net income left for land charges.
S.
There is general agreement that crested wheatgrase (Agropyron
cristatum) is the grass which gives the best results for arti­
ficial revegetation in most parts of Montana,
For this reason
that grass was used in the study.
4.
Certain assumptions, such as the value of an animal month of
grazing capacity and the cost of drilling seed per acre, were
drawn from other studies.
If the judgment of the reader dic­
tates that these assumptions are incorrect for hie particular
Csse, he can substitute hie own figure for these as well as
data applying to his particular land area.
Source of Data
The data used were obtained chiefly from six sources, which are as
follows*
1.
Data for comparing amount of crop land at different times for
Montana counties were taken from the United States Agricultural
Census.
2.
Data, concerning land use and farm practices including restora­
tion land, idle lend, and grass seeding were obtained from state
Agricultural Adjustment Administration records.
£.
The County Agents' supplementary crop reports were used to
—21—
dcternlne the cpproximate emount of erected wheatgraes c o m In
?9 countIer and the value of this grcse for forage and seed.
4.
Figures compiled from Western Rcnge Survey field sheets were
iised to determine carrying capacity of different types of range
in Valley County, and a type map, aIeo a result of the W e e t e m
Range Survey, has been used to illustrate the problem of aban­
doned crop land.
5.
A questionnaire was mailed to LOO farmers (200 In Valley County,
48 In Fallon County, and 52 In Toole County) for the purpose of
getting information concerning crested wheatgrass seeding under
actual farm conditions.
A return of about 55 per cent was ob­
tained from this questionnaire, which was arranged in very simple
form.
Its chief function was to aid in determining the degree
of success farmers have obtained from sowing crested wheatgrass
by different methods of rowing, and time required to get the
grass up.
6.
Dat;: concerning carrying capacity of crested wheatgrass pasture
were obtained from the reports of the Judith Basin Branch of the
Montana Agricultural Experiment Station.
-22-
ANALYSIS OF PASTURE VALUE
ffhat Shall be Done -."Ith Sukiarzln&l Crop Land."
Perennial Gr&BE the Nature! Cllaax Vegetation.— The problem here
under consideration is as follows*
We are given a large acreage of crop
land in Montana which is found to be unsuitable for farming.
Some of it
is obviously Eubmargin&l but is being kept in production by subsidy of
one kind or another.
Eventually it may drop out of production.
Still
other of this submarginal land has been abandoned to weeds and grass­
hoppers*-
mute evidence that either someone made a faulty estimate of
its normal productivity in relation to costs and prices, or else a short
time viewpoint was held.
What is to be done with this land?
The logical answer is that It should be and will be returned to
grass, either through the slow process of natural revegetation (through
the stages of plant succession) or through artificial revegetation.
The
natural climax vegetation over most of the dry land farming area is per­
ennial grass, and if the land is left undisturbed for a period of years,
grass "silently resumes the throne from which it has been expelled, but
which it never abdicates.
Natural Revegetation.— Tlie process of natural revegetation of aban­
doned crop land is a slow one.
It is estliated that it requires about 50
years under average conditions and with unrestricted grazing to replace
I.
Ingalls, John J. Quoted from his "Blue Grass" by Leo Edw. Melchers in
Grosses in Kansas, Report of Kansas State Board of Agriculture, Topeka,
Kansas, 1956, p. 8.
-25the weeds which appear first with a good stand of native forage grasses by
this oethod,
Table II shows the result of a study of plant succession on
abandoned land made in Fheatl nd County by E. ff. Nelson in 1955.
Because
of the slov return of the most valuable species blue grama, the land had
after 16 years only about one-half the grazing capacity of native range.
There is little incentive for private individuals to own this type of land,
and unless the return for reseeding till justify the cost, this land will
go to make up what is termed the "new public domain".
The chief cost of
natural revegetation is the time element, to be brought out in the Anal­
ysis of Costs.
Non Pecuniary Value of Grass.— There are reasons other than its
value for pasture, for the desirability of getting abandoned crop land into
grass, which, especially from the social point of view, have a bearin
on
the amount which can profitably be spent in order to get a good cover of
grass as soon as possible.
Experiments have shown very conclusively that
grass has great value in controlling water run-off end soil erosion.
On
certain watersheds this may be very important from the standpoint of flood
control or the prevention of silting of reservoirs.
This characteristic
is also important from the standpoint of soil conservation and prevention
of the lowering of the water table.
Where soil is subject to ?ind erosion,
grass may be very valuable, not only in preventing soil loss but in prep
venting the discomfort caused by duet storms
2.
and the loss to crops and
"Much of the state’s low yielding lands could be eliminated without ma­
terially affecting the state’s total wheat production," writes E. A.
Starch (Bui. 218, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, iionti-na’s
Dry Lana Agricultur . p. 10). It is alleged, however, that dust layers
from plains dust storms settled in homes in Weehin ton, D. C. during
the spring of 1954.
-24TABLE ii.— OCCtmfiMCE
of native species on various
types of land
ZB WHEATLAND COUNTY, MONTANA, 19S5*
Mi
-<vA4v
-J
-f
i
L-am
Vtd
grass land
Species
Per cent
Blue grama
Abandoned plowed land
1 - 5
years
Per cent
56.0
Bluestem
Needle and thread
June grass
0
16 years
and more
Per cent
2.0
5.0
5.4
6.0
12.0
12.0
18.0
12.5
1.0
15.6
20.0
. 16.0
1.0
2.0
0
**
Other grasses
11-15
years
Per cent
7.8
4.0
Native blucgrase
6-10
years
Per cent
0
5.0
0
**
•**
**
**
**
4.0
4.0
8.0
1.0
2.0
2.5
Dryland sedges
15.0
Total grasses end
gresslike plants
76.5
7.0
55.6
45.0
47.7
Perennial and
biennial weeds
4.6
15.4
16.2
15.4
12.4
Annual weeds (mostly
Russian thistle)
5.2
72.5
50.2
18.4
15.0
15.9
7.5
20.1
25.2
£6.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Browse
Total
*
Source*
The JVegtera Range. Senate Document 199, Waehington, D. C., 1956,
Table 48, p. £44. (Study by E. W. Nelaon, no* Head of Department
of Range and Pasture Management, Colorado State College, Fort
Collins, Colorado)
** Less than 0.5 per cent
-25Craas In adjoining fields due to wind driven particles of sand*
Although
there is no suitable measure for It, there is oven an aesthetic value in
the appearance of a wolI-grassed area in conperlscm with one covered w i t h
weeds and drifting soil.
These, as well as the stabilization of the agri­
cultural industry, are considerations which nuot guide public agencies in
deterninin
the procedure for regrassing abandoned fern la d wiiich has Le-
cczie public property or in subsidizing roseeding operations of private in­
dividuals or groups.
It is the increasing Importance, as our civilization becones nore
complex and as its different aspects become rsoro and nore finely inter­
related, of taking into account social cost and social incone that justi­
fies the increasing emphasis in land planning Iy public agencies.
The
purpose of planning activities, involving such phases as public purchase
of subrsarginal land, changes in land tenure, exorcise of police power ty
rural zoning, or creation of cooperative soil conservation and grazing
districts, is not solely to protect the interests of the remote future, but
m y bo to benefit people now living.
A feature of the traditional American
attitude, that every nan should enjoy a right to the unrestricted ownership
of a piece of earth. Is being modified as it becomes increasingly possible
for great ztunbers to suffer loss because of the way a private owner handles
Ills lend.
For example, a nonresident m y have become the owner of an area of
plains grassland for speculative purposes.
As a private owner, it night
—26—
p o Ibly be a wise course for him to plow the lend and chance getting two
or three good crops from the new land, even though It should turn out to
be bad "blow land" In the years to follow.
But from the standpoint of the
neighbors who are In the path of the dust from the area - even In some
years of people living as far as the eastern seaboard - this method of
handling the land may involve a social cost far in excess of the return to
the C ner.
Conversely, the return from restoring a piece of i bandoned crop
land to grass may not justify the entire expense from the standpoint of the
individual entrepreneur, but if putting the land to grass prevents bad dust
storms, helps to prevent floods, prevents silting of reservoirs or naviga­
tion channels, or, by adding to the aesthetic qualities of the landscape,
helps attract tourists, the social income added to the private income might
more than justify the expense.
All this is tied in with differences in social and inaivitiu&l time
discount, involving such considerations as the continuity and security of
the state, costliness in periodically liquidating and recreating communi­
ties, or the probability of developing substitutes or changing require­
ments.
The evaluation of these broad social considerations has been termed
5
a "frontier in land economics".
For the present, in reference to a range
restoration program, we can only assume that these values are given con­
crete expression in subsidies to farmers or in seeding activities on pub­
licly owned land.
5.
Gray, L. C., and Regan, Mark, "Needed Points of Development and Re­
orientation in Land Economic Theory," Journal ol Farm Economics. Vol.
XXII, February, 1940, p. 46.
27P&Lture for Livestock the Priaarv Consider;tlon.— In determining the
proper procedure for returning the submarginal crop lend to ite natural
cover, hoiever, allowance e made for the protecting and healing values of
grass «ill be only incidental to the primary consideration - its value ae
pasture for livestock.
In regions of very limited rainfall the utilizer
o- land comes very early up to the margin of intensive cultivation.
Ob­
viously, land which nay have no value ee wheat Itnd may have value ne pas­
ture because of the difference in costs (fixed and variable) of producing
the two products.
Since grass is a perennial crop, there is no outlay for
seed or for seeding and tillage operations.
pasture is
The expense of harvesting of
Iso cut down to whatever management practices ere necessary to
effect proper utilization of the feed by livestock.
grass land which has no value for pasture.
There is, of course,
An extreme cese would be an
area on which the grass is so poor that an animal uses up all its energy
in going about hunting enough food to keep alive.
If the grass were better,
but too far from water and not good enough to pay for the necessary invest­
ment in water development, we get the same result (no value).
This line of
reasoning holds for all the costs which might be related to utilization of
pasture land, including such items as fences, water development, eradica­
tion of poisonous plants, and reseeding operations.
Also, such items as
excessive supplemental feed costs due to unbalanced ranch units Aist be
considered.
How Value of Pasture Lanq is Deteradnod.— The value o. lane, for pas­
ture* then, must be determined by examining, the cost of producing and util­
izing the feed in relation to the value of the feed in terms of animal
—28—
4
months of feed.
Glnce the objective of this study I b to put the method of
analysis on such a basis that by its use the feasibility of : rtiflcial revegotation may be examined from the standpoint of different types of owner­
ship, the costs have been divided into two groups:
(a) the cost of estab­
lishing anti utilizing the pasture and (b) the costs arising directly from
ownership of land, i.e., taxes and interest.
In order to determine the
feasibility of trtificil revegetation, it is proposed to carry the analy­
sis through the following three stages:
1.
Detenaine the value of pasture so established.
2.
Determine the cost of establishing and utilizing this pasture.
3.
After determining the expected net income which is available for
land charges, attempt to reach some conclusion
g to the practi­
cality of the project from the standpoint of private or public
ownership.
Crested Eheatgrees
History of Use in Montana and Present Trend.— It has been indicated
that because there is general agreement that crested vheatgraes is the most
satisfactory grass for use in artificial revegetation in Montana, that grass
will be used in this analysis.
Eome experimental
ork has been done on
crested wheat grass in this region since it was first imported from Siberia
in 1898 (by the United Etates Department of Agriculture) but it attracted4
4.
An "animal month" is defined as the amount of forage required in one
month by tn "animal unit". A 1000 pound steer or its equivalent is
usually given es an "animal unit". A mature cow or 5 sheep are usually
given as equivalent to a 1000 pound steer.
little attention until ,-bout 1915,
nd it was not until the native range
vac greatly affected by the extreme drought in the early IdlSO1B that the
grass came into extensive use.
After crested wheatgraps had demonstrated
Ite superior ability to withetend drought and produce under conditions of
little moisture, the grace has gained rapidly in popularity.
Its use has
been encouraged by the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, Montana
Exteneion Service, end agencies such as the Soil Conservation Service and
Farm Security Administration.
The recent increase in the use of crested wheatgraes in Montana ie
demonstrated by data included in the yearly reports on supplemental crops
by county extension agents of 59 Montana counties.
The estimated amount of
crested wheatgress for these counties in 1356 was approximately 4000 acres
(Sue table III).
Over half of this fcae cut for seed.
At that time seed
¥,&£ selling for 50#.' to 60? per pound and whenever there was a good seed
crop, this proved to be the most profitable use.
As the value of the grass
became more widely recognized end, as a result of study and experience, in­
formation was obtained concerning the planting, growing, and bundling of the
crop, its use became more widespread.
crested
In 1359, the estimated amount of
theetgrase on crop land in the 59 counties was £63,707 acres.
of seed crop for these £9 counties in 1959 wes estimated at 48,2.06.
Acres
This
large acreage plus a good seed year has Increased the supply of crested
wheatgress seed so that In the fell of 1959 the seed sold at 10? to 15? per
pound.
This low priced seed was an added incentive for sowing crested wheat-
grass for hay and pasture, and reports from farmers, county agents and, soil
conservation men indicate that there has been a large lncre ee in the number
of acres sown in the fall of 1959.
-
50-
TABLE IIIe- A C K E S OF CRESTED ViIEATGRASS OS FARK U H D
IH 59 IXIIiTAIA COUBTIES, 1936 Rad 1559*
Cotmty
Acres of crested wheatgrass
1935
1959
Beaverhead
Big Horn
Blaine
CIxmteau
Custer - Boeder River
Daniels
Dawson
Fnllon-Carter
Fergus
Flathead
Garfield — Petrolcun
Glacier
Hill
Judith Basin
Lake
Lewis end Clark - Broadwater
Hacieon - Jefferson
Keagher
Park
Phillips
Pondera
Prairie
RiehlaM
Roosevelt
Rosebud
Senders
Sheridan
Stillwater
Swetfjruss
Toole
56
54
214
10
COO
G20
10
2C0
800
87.5
483
34
32
100
SO
300
Valley
Viheatland
Wlhaiac
Yellowstone
240
100
total
*^,“859efc
400
1,000
26,000
12,000
500
18,000
10,000
16,000
14,000
24,000
25,000
'776
20,000
12,000
1,250
4,000
1,950
5,021
3,000
20,500
7,245
20,000
12,000
6,500
8,000
1,000
10,000
2,000
266
6,000
50,000
12,000
10,000
5,000
563, W
• Source - County Extension AronttS reports on supplemental crops
to Ralph D e I ercor, State Extension Agrononiste
-51Natnral Characteristics of Crested "Tiectcr&se.— Acong the natural
characteristics which make crested wheatgrass especially adapted to arti­
ficial reseeding for pasture in Montana are the following:5
1.
Remarkable drought resistance.
Crested wheatgraes, after it
has become well established, will go into t. dormant condition
when weather becomes very hot and dry, but no amount of drought
seems to kill it in Montane.
2.
Longevity.
The grass is a long lived perennial.
5.
Marked cold resistance.
Crested wheatgr&es is not subject to
frost injury or winter killing.
For this reason it is very
valuable in furnishing early spring and late fall pasture.
4.
Adaptability to a wide variety of soil types.
ever, very alkali tolerant.
5.
Excellent seed production.
6.
Extensive root systems.
sistance is probably due.
It is not, how­
Does best on light soils.
To this characteristic its drought re­
This extensive root system also acids
fiber to the coil.
7.
Palatability.
Crested wheatgruss equals ell other grasses in
palfctability, although there is a period during the summer when
the plant goes into a dormant stage and the forage becomes harsh
and non palatable.
8.
Tolerance to close grazing and trampling.
The grass is not killed
out or damaged easily by heavy use.
5.
Stevenson, Clark, und Maclseaac, Seeding Crested Wheetgraas for Hay and
Pasture, Pub. ; .7, Department of Agriculture, Dominion of Canada, Ottawa,
-52Its Role in the rtench .',-una.-recent Plan.— Because of these character­
istics, crested wheatgrase is of value in a unique iey in regard to its
role in the management plan of an individual ranch.
The following is a
statement of the value of crested wheatgrase as given in the yearly report
of Ralph D. Mercer:^
nFron the experiments sighted above, from the Moccasin Station, and
from observetions of stockmen and Extension Agents, it appears that
the main values of crested wheatgrase are to be obtained as follows:
1.
From seed production for use on the same ranch where grown
for sale.
2.
From hay cut before the plant comes into bloon. Cut at this
time, the hay is palatable and not coarse and hard at it is
when cut later.
5.
From heavy use in the early spring before other pastures are
reedy. Later allowing the plant to ;;:rov; up for hay or fall
pasture.
4.
For early pastures for ewes and lambs or cows and calves
near the headquarters.
5.
For flushing ewes after hay has been cut from the field.
Fields will make good growth after hay is cut #;nd is good
succulent pasture. This pasture is not so valuable when
seed is cut because of lateness oi cutting or because of
high coarse stubble.
6.
To raise hay and pasture on land too poor to rsiee any other
crop under dry land conditions after the land has been plowed
and found to be unprofitable.”
It is the opinion of many farmers and agronomists of Montana that
crestod wheatgrass, in areas to which it is adapted, is superior to native
grasses in that it gives & greater and more uniform production of forage
over & period of years.
6.
This opinion has been confirmed by experiment in6
Mercer, Ralph D., Montana Extension Agronomist, TearIy Report, Bozeman,
Montane, 1959, p. 65.
-SSeoiiie areas.
lDie chief reasons for this superiority are its remarkable
drought resistance and its resistance to cold.
The drought resistance of crested isheatgrass is due in part to
its extensive root system.
Mr. J. K. Pavlychenko of the University of
Easktitchenan found that a tv.o-year-old clump of crested nheatgrass had
"210 miles of roots probing through a mass of soil seven feet deep and
7
four feet square".
Because of this root system, the grass is successful
in need control, a good forage plant, and a remarkably efficient binder
of the soil against the wind erosion that starts dust storms. Mr. Ray
Q
Haight' raises the question; however, whether crested whe&tgrass might
9
not tend to "harvest moisture"
iS alfalfa has been found to do.
Because
of the different moisture requirements, it is quite unlikely that the grass
would have the same effect as alfalfa, but it is conceivable that long time
planning estimates made for the purpose of planning entirely on the basis
of the production of the first several years might be misleading.
Even if
tho grass should thin out and lose some of its vigor in time, it might7
9
8
7.
8.
9.
Thone, Frank, "Prairie Grass Roots," Ecience. Vol. 85, No. 2196,
January 29, 1957, Supplement p. 8.
H ight, Rsy, State Representative of the Bureau of Agricultural Eco­
nomics, Division of State and Local Planning. Interview, December 22,
1959, Bozeman, Montana.
In some areas In the Dakotas alfalfa does quite well for a few years
as the roots follow the moisture down, and then the plants die and for
a period of years the field ill not grow alfalfa. Alfalfa will not
grow with the amount of moisture Vurnished by normal rainfall, but it
will grow for a few years by making use of stored subsoil moisture.
This process of using up subsoil moisture is spoken of as "harvesting
moisture". Crested wheatgrass will grow with the amount of moisture
furnished by normal rainfall, but Its roots have the -bility to go down
deep after stored moisture, and it may yield a return while using up
the reserve which it cannot maintain over a period of years.
Gtill b& a superior forage crop.
The fact that crested Kheatgrass is resistant to cold not only p r o ­
tects it from winter killing but also allows for an early spring and late
fall growth of forage.
This not only makes for more forage because of a
longar growing season, but there are several advantages in having the growth
at these particular times.
The early and late pasture reduces the hay re­
quirement and consequently reduces the cost of feeding.
It allows for
better management of the native range because it reduces the temptation to
turn on to it before it is ready.
The green feed in the fall comes at a
convenient time for flushing ewes for breeding and the early spring growth
makes a good milk flow for lambs and calves.
It is tllegod that some ranch­
men object to crested wheatgr&ss for range cows because of the necessity of
milking out cows at calving time in order to prevent the udders from spoil­
ing - a difficult practice indeed with some "wild" range cows.
By listing the advantages of crested >~heatgraes re given by those
who are enthusiastic in advocating its use, a case may be built for it
which seems almost too good to believe.
study to "sell" crested vheatgrass.
It is not
an
objective of this
There is substantial evidence that
this grass does have certain advantages over native grrsses, and consid­
eration
ill be given these advantages in the model esse which is to follow.
It is our task to develop $ method whereby it
may be
discovered whether the
value of the grass will cover the cost of establishing and utilizing it
m d e r different conditions.
In view of the fact that there seems to be a tendency to oversell s
new idea or new product, care should be taken to consider the possible
Ilmltetione of crested Wheetgrees.
to harvest moisture as one.
fce heve suggested a possible tendency
Another is that crested ^heatgrese till not
continue to grow during hot, ary souther but goes into a dormant stage.
While in this stage it is not palatable Ior livestock, nor does It ti,ake
good hay unless it is cut before the plant comes into bloom.
For this
reason it may take more careiul management to utilize crested wheatgraes
profitably then native range.
It is necessary lor the rancher to consider
a balance between crested wheatgrass and native range in order to have some
of the native grasses, which are very palatable when cured on the stalk,
for use during the period when crested wheatgrnss is in the dormant stage.
Mr. Haight suggests that a rancher who buys for a ranch unit an area com­
prised entirely
01
abandoned crop land which he sows to crested wheat&rass
can "lose his shirt" because of this reason.
Comnmrison vdth other Grasses (Productivity).— Results from studies
at Judith Basin Branch Station involving the pasturing of beef cattle on
three types oi ranges indicate that erected wheatgrass was definitely su­
perior to other grasses in that area during the period from 1954 to 1919.
Three pastures of 25.6 acres each were used in the study - one of crested
wheatgrass, one of brome grass, and one of native range.
Ioruge plants on
the native grass pasture were blue grama, dry land secfce, western wheatgrass, needlegreee, end June grass.
The brome grass, which is second only
to crested wheatgrass for reseeding purposes in Montana, is inferior to it,
partly because of its well known tendency to uecoac sou bound ana to thin
out in a few years.1
0
10.
Interview, December 22, 1959, Bozeman, Montana
— So—
6uamarl*ed data from thit gtudy are presented in table IV.
of thie table reveals some interesting, facte.
A study
During the 6 year period,
wie jfiuld oI crested uheatgrass in pounds oi beof per acre and in number
ox tinical days of pasture aas almost exactly double that of the native
grass.
(See figures s and i)
For this period, then, the crested wheat-
grass pasture hag proved itself to be twice as productive as native range,
i roja whs standpoint ol land planning, hoiscvor, it it necessary to study
these data in relation to precipitation.
TIic average annual rainfall for
the G year period was 10.98 inches and the seasonal rainfall (April I to
September CO) was 7.65 inches, at compared to the LI year annual and sea­
sonal averages at this station of 14.85 inches ana 10.70 inches respect­
ively.
Chi examining table V, we discover that the crested wheatgraee has
the greatest advantage in the extremely diy years of 1054 and 1957 and
that as the rainfall more nearly approaches the 51 year average (1986 and
1989), the advantage is less marked.
(Dee also figures 5, 4 and 5)
Also,
it is apparent that the greatest differences in the two pastures was in
the year when the seasonal rainfall was the lowest, namely, 1357.
figure 5)
(£ee
In view of the comparatively shallow root systems of the native
grasses this dependence upon seasonal rainfall seems quite logical.
In no year from 1954 to 19J9 was the precipitation, cither annual
or seasonal, as high as the 51 year averages.
Since for tha purpose of
planning we must use long-time normal values, it Is necessary for us to
consider the fact that as the rainfall approaches normal, the crested
wheatgraes produces only about Ju. times as much forage as the native grass.
-27TABLE IV.— YIELD OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PASTURE AND PRECIPITATION
AT MOCCASIN STATION, 1934 TO 1959*
Year and
type of pasture
Livestock
gains in
pounds
per acre
Animal
days per
acre
1954
Crested wheatgrass
Native
44.4
10.9
24.8
7.1
1955
Crested wheatgrass
Native
54.2
28.0
£5.9
11.9
1956
Crested wheatgrass
Native
61.0
54.7
29.2
15.6
1957
Crested wheatgrass
Native
41.1
6,1
20.5
5.4
1956
Crested wheatgrass
Native
78.6
56.6
45.0
27.1
1959
Crested wheatgrass
Native
86.7
50.5
40.7
26.8
Average, 6 years
Crested wheatgrass
Native
61.0
51.1
50.7
15.5
*
Sources
Annual
precipitctlon**
Seasonal
precipitation**
9.57
6.78
9.89
6.49
10.07
7.61
9.58
5.64
14.65
10.64
12.00
8.74
10.96
7.65
Teble g, Appendix.
** The SI year annual precipitation at the Moccaein Station is 14.85 inches;
seasonal, (April I to September 50) 10.7 inches.
-58-
GAINS, POUNDS PER ACRE
120
IOO -
1934
1935
1936
1937
YEARS
1938
1939
AVERAGE
FIGURE 3.— YIELD OF CRESTED WHEATGRASS PASTURE AND NATIVE
GRASS PASTURE AT THE MOCCASIN STATION, 1954 TO 1959
Measured in Pounds per Acre Gained by Livestock*
ANIMAL DAYS PER ACRE
60
1934
1935
1936
1937
YEARS
1938
1939
AVERAGE
FIGURE 4,— YIELD OF CRESTED WHEATGRASS PASTURE AND NATIVE
GRASS PASTURE AT THE MOCCASIN STATION, 1954 TO 1939
Measured in Animal Days Carrying Capacity per Acre*
♦Source of Data:
Table E, Appendix
TABLE V.— RELATION Oi PiiECIPITATION TO COMPARATIVE YIELD
OF CRESTED WHEATGfiAES AND NATIVE RANGE
AT MOCCASIN STATION, 1954 TO 1959
Year
Yield, of crested wheatgr&se
compared with native grass
Livestock
gains, Ibe.
Animal
per acre
days
per cent
per cent
Precipitation compared with
SI year normal
Annual
Seasonal
precipi­
precipi­
tation
tation*
per cent
per cent
1954
407.4
549.5
64.4
65.4
1955
195.6
£17.6
66.6
60.6
1926
175.8
214.7
67.8
71.1
1957
673.8
575.9
64.5
52.7
1958
158.9
158.7
98.5
99.4
1959
172.4
151.9
80.8
81.8
Average,
6 years
196.1
200.7
75.8
71.5
* pril I to September 50
PRODUCTION OF
CRESTED WHEATGRASS
500
400
300
200
SEASONAL PRECIPITATION
1934
YEARS
FIGURE 5
COMPARISON OF PRODUCTION OF CRESTED WHEATGRASS
(LIVESTOCK GAINS PER ACRE) WITH PRODUCTION OF NATIVE GRASS
IN RELATION TO RAINFALL AT MOCCASIN STATION, 1954 TO 1939*
♦Source of Data:
Table V
SEASONAL PRECIPITATION AS A PERCENT OF 31 YEAR AVERAGE
IODUCTION OF CRESTED WHEATGRASSCPOUNDS
ED PER ACRE) AS A PERCENT OF NATIVE GRASS
-40-
-41Thls figure "-111 be used for the purpose of Bnelysice
show that this figure is not correct.11
Further study may
This, however, should not affect
the usefulness of the method of anelysie.
There ere different v.nys of epproaohlng the evaluation of future
range possibilities from reseeding.
Range management workers advise that
unless n species has been tried out in a particular area or under very
similar condition, a small test plot should be tried before spending much
money on reseeding.
This is sound advice.
If the species has been tried
under t certain set of conditions end found to ,:>ive certain results - say
a certain rate of productivity in relation to native range - it retrains
for the economist to examine the value of the forage produced in relation
to costs.
If the carrying capacity of nativ.- range in an area is knorn
end the relation of the productivity of crested vheatgraas to native range
in the area or under similar conditions, then the probable productivity in
animal month carrying capacity of a proposed artificially reveget ted pas­
ture may be estimated.
Value of an Animal Month of Forage.— If the
.uount of forage rhich
will be produced is determined, then it is necessary only to find the value
of the for'%:<?.
Pasture forage is usually measured in terns of animuL months
carrying capacity per grazing seeson.
Eince the gains per animal month
proved to bo almost exactly the same for native grass pasture and erected
wheatgraes pasture in the Judith Basin Branch Station study, we shell
11.
Even If created heatgrasa should be I o m d to s l a c k e n in forage pro­
duction after a period because o . " h a r v e s t i n g " subsoil moisture, its
ability to utilize early spring moisture would probably give it an
advantage.
-42conslder an anln&l ncmtJi of each to bo of equal food value.
A a e n i m l month
O j. e rested Wheatrjrass pasture, then, would have the eeg» oeononlc value as
an an Inal month of native ^rugs ptsturo used at the sane tine.
portant to note, W
It is im­
ever, that o n atod wheat-rasa Ims special value because
of its unique role in the ranch plan.
The early spring end late fall pasture
is rare valuable than the sunncr pasture because it replaces more expensive
feeding.
At tlm
I oecasln station the 6 year avers* o starting date was 28
days earlier for crested Wueatgrass than for native range (See table E, Appejiulx;, and tne cl os in, date was 12 clays later, making the season longer Iy
43 days.
Obviously, some of this 43 days of feed might well have replaced
costly hay and grain feeding and would be of greater value than the average
native range feed.
Probably the most suitable method of determining the
valuo of crested wimatgraas posture is to find the value of the feed -which
it can replace.
Because no study has been node of the value of the feed re­
placed by the early spring end Iato fall groslng, the best we can do in this
connection is to present some figures on the value of native pasture in the
area under discussion, make s o m allowance for the extra value of the early
caid late feed, end assume our figure to be correct for the purpose of carry­
ing the analysis through a model, or de; onstration, case.
Chts index o f the value of an animal month of native pasture is the
leaee value of range in the area under consideration.
Studies made by
E. II. Saunderson, Louis Vinko, end D. %. Chittenden 12 indicate that "Under
competitive conditions the range stockman (in Uontema) will pay in one form
12.
Saunderson, Ti. E., and Chittenden, D. W., Cattle Ranchin-: in Montana,
Bui. 541, I ontona Ag ricultural T xporinent ^tal'i'bn," b o s m m n , IonEanaT
raty 1937, p. 14.
or another
od to 55X on arinal nonth for g r M l n c , as an average ovor sever­
al years.
If erasing costs on leased public lands is nuch below tills point,
nearby Imy and range land OKied by the operator will becore nore valuable,
and tills added value will eventually appear as a land coat."^^
In 1536, far ors in Valley County who ran cattle on the Ikirth Velloy
cooperative district paid a fee of SleOO per a a i m l unit for 8 uonthe of
gras leg.
"Operators (Wiere) generally believe that a grazing charge of
C2.00 per aninal unit for an 8 nonth grazing w a s o n is about the nexhw.:,
since tl'ie land charge on feed base property will usually anount to another
2*00 to J2.50 per aninal unit." 1
14
3
The low fee charged in the grazing dis­
tricts is due to the low charge for the use of public lands which co. prised
a large part of the districts.
(Sec table X, pare 67)
These feus m y
eventually be raised to Wie level of those paid on other lands, and if not,
tlmy will in the long run be offset by an advance in land charges on coi.>nensurate ranch property.
R. H. Sterling, County Agent of Roosevelt County, writes, "From $1.60
to (2.00 per Iicad is considered a reasonable rate for grazing lands for an
3 month season.
The cost varies from this to around 60/ per head per nonth
which is a eosamon charge in the eastern part of the county."^5
13.
14.
15.
See also Saunderson, M. Tl., and Yinko, Louis, The cononicB of Rsnre
g m o p !reduction in ont&na, Bui. 502, ' onWmaligricullural "Spuri^ent
Station, Boteiaon,"Tbntoiiu, June, 1535, p. 51 j and Saunderson, I!. II.,
A nethod for tho Valuation of Livestock Ranch IVopcrties and !razing
cTf. A, M m tana Agricultural Lxporb I n t s ta tio n ,
Tbrhmna, March I, 1958, pp. 4 and 14.
Saunderson, K. E., and Monte, B. W., Orozing Districts in Montana.
Bui. 326, Montana Agricultural ExperJbTcnt Station, Bozeman,.iOo'c', p. 14.
Sterling, R* !I., County Agent of Eoosevolt County, Correspondence,
December 19, 1939.
Although these figures indicate that the 8 months summer range is
valued at about 25f per
nimal month in the vicinity of Valley County, be­
cause of its role in furnishing early and late grazing, crested v,heatgrass
will replace some of the higher cost feeding in periods when native grasses
cannot be grazed.
Its value should be considered to be at least bO; per
snlaal month of grazing capacity.
is assumed to be correct.
For the purpose of analysis this figure
—45—
ANALYSIS OF COSTS OF ARTIFICIAL RESEEDING
Having GBtimated the expected value of the proposed reseeding pro­
ject, the next step is to examine the cost to be incurred In establishing
and utilizing the pasture.
feed crop end its value
The difference between the yearly cost of the
ill obviously be what determines the value of the
land end the feasibility of trying to utilize it in this way under differ­
ent conditions end types of ownership.
below and certain facts concerning them.
The elements of costs are given
These costs v ill vary with the
individual cases, but they are, nevertheless, costs which should be
considered.
Deed
Because crested wheatgraes seed is very small (over 250,000 seeds
per poi ad), it is possible to get a good stand by planting 4 pounds per
acre,
although when seed is not too expensive, some farmers feel that the
chance of getting a better stand is worth the cost of applying a little
more seed.
Greeted srheatgrese sold for about 15* per pound in Montana in
2
the fall of 1929,
and in view of the large acreage of the grass in Montana
at present, it does not seem likely that the price will return to its for­
mer level of 50 to 600 per pound.
If we assume for our purpose a seeding
rate of 4 pounds per acre and & seed price of 15* per pound, the cost of
seed vU l be 60* per acre.1
1.
2.
Zeidler, Gib, County Extension Agent, Fallon end Carter counties.
respondence, November 21, 1959.
Ibid.
Cor­
Seeding ODenitions
In order to get good results In sowing crested uhefatgrase it is nec­
essary to have a fine seed bed, and it is also & good plan to have stubble
8
or weeds to protect the seedlings front wind.^
For these reasons the iaost
common practice in Montane is to drill the seed in vith no seed bed prepa­
ration.
"Broadcast seeding on abandoned farm land without any other field
4
operation has met with much less success than drilling."
Of a sample of
5,491 acres of crested wheatgras* seeding taken by questionnaire to Valley
County farmers, only £94 acres or 10.8 per cent was sown broadcast; of
1,842 acres sown in 1929, only 6.1 per cent was sown broadcast, as shown
in table VI.
The reason for this decline in the use of the broadcasting
method may be explained by the fact that of the broadcast seeding sown
from 1925 to 1928, only 50.6 per cent had a stand established by the winter
of 1929 as compared with 64.8 per cent of that sown with a disk drill.
This difference in the chance for success would probably offset the extra
cost of drilling.
Estimates of cost of drilling vary from 25 to
75$ per acre, with
5Qg per acre being the most common figure given, which seems to be a rea­
sonable figure for our use.^
5.
4.
5.
Crcoaer, Arthur,
Inventory of R a m e Resources of Petroleum County.
Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and liange Experiment Station, Mieeoula,
Montan,' , July 21, 1928, p. 25,
Harmen, Kenneth %., Junior Soil Conservationist at Malta, Montana. Cor­
respondence, November 2, 1929.
(Project includes Blaine, Phillips and
Valley counties)
See Cramer, Arthur, Op. Cit.. p. 26.
Also Zeidler, Gib, Op. Clt.
-47
TAffi.1 VI.— kiETHOD USLB FOR SOWING CRESTED
IMTGiJ-SS
Saiaple Taken In Valley, F a H o n , and Toole Countlefc
For leers ISES to 1929
County
and year
Valley County
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
H l years
Fallon Coimty
19 SS
1926
1957
1928
1929
All years
Toole County
1926
1927
1928
1329
All years
Sown with
disk drill
Per cent
&o*n
broadcast
Per cent
tovm siith
furrow drill
Per cent
100.0
92.0
87.2
76.9
95.9
8.0
10.5
21.1
6.1
88.5
10.8
100.0
76.2
72.0
45.0
95.4
£2.8
£8.0
25.0
6.6
20.0
——
76.5
18.5
5.2
5.8
n -T11-J.
100.0
94.2
100.0
100.0
--- in
—
—
——
2.2
-- ..
—
.7
—
- ---- rr
— —
97.5
2.6
Valley, I a H o n and
Toole counties
1955
1926
1927
1958
1929
100.0
91.6
87.0
78.9
94.5
6.4
11.6
18.8
5.7
1.4
2.2
—
All years
88.7
10.4
.9
-i.ir ni
—
-48-
Allowance for liisk
Among the hazards to success in establishing a stand of crested
vrheatgrass, the three most often mentioned by research
orkere imd by the
farmers are grasshoppers, drought and wind, all of which will kill the
grass only in the seedling stage.
The following are examples of penciled
remarks on questionnaires returned by farmers from Valley, Fallon and Toole
counties;
"Got a shower and it came up, and then we didn't get any more
rain and it all died."
off."
"Blew out."
"Came up but grasshoppers ate it all
M n d is harmful to seedling plants both because of its drying quali­
ties (especially hot wind) and because of the scouring qualities of drift­
ing soil particles.
Type and condition of soil have
growing crested wheatgraes.
& bearing on success in starting and
The Soil Conservation Service has sown 18,68$
acres of crested wheatgr&ee near Roundup, Montana, and a larger acreage in
the Malta project. In these areas the better stands seem to be on the
g
lighter soils.
"On soils such as Ecobey loam. Turner fine sandy loam, end
Laurel loom, which raised good crops end good stands of grass during sea­
sons of abundant rainfall, stands of crested wheatgrass may be expected.
On soils such as Phillips clay loam, Pierre clay loam and the Lisnuis Series,
where only a small amount of grass now grows, and where 'blov-holes1 occur,
7
the possibilities of getting stands are decreased."6
7
6.
7.
Spaulding, Curtis J., Project Manager at R o m d u p , Montana.
ence, November 12, 1929.
Harmen, Kennetii If., O p . Cit.
Correspond­
—4s»
Where much of the surface soil has been removed, the chances of suc­
cess in starting crested wheatgraee or other grasses are reduced.
tain areas* this
m y be an important factor.
In cer­
In Petroleum County, for in­
stance, "Increased wind and water erosion has removed 25 to 75 per cent of
the surface soil on much of the 96,740 acres of abandoned crop land. ...
Artificial revegetation, contouring, and deferred grazing are reco onended
to hasten recovery on each area where a soil survey, to determine the po­
tential productivity of this land. Indicates these improvement practices
Q
ere economically feasible."
In order to get data concerning success in obtaining a catch of
crested wheatgrase and the length of time required to get the grass estab­
lished under actuel far
conditions a questionnaire was amiled in December,
1929» to 280 farmers In Montana - 200 to Valley County, 52 to Toole County,
and 48 to Fallon County - with a return of about 55 per cent.
Data were
obtained for 5,527 acres of crested wheatgrase (140 fields) sown by all
methods in these counties from 1955 to 1958.
Of this total, a stand of
crested wheatgrase was established on 5278.7 acres (59.5 per cent of the
area) by December, 1939.
In Valley County a stand was obtained on 2285.2
acres, or 62.6 per cent of the 5,649 acres sown, as compared with 64.7 per
cent in Toole County and 52.4 per cent in Fallon County.
(See table VII)
The samples from Toole and Fallon counties (18 ,nd 21 fields respectively)
are so email that it is unsafe to conclude that these figures indicate a
significant difference between the counties, although there are grounds8
8.
Cramer, Arthur, Po, Clt.. p. 2
■50-
TABLE
VII.— f UCCECS EI ESTABLISHING
STML OF CRESTED TIiTATGRAEE
BY DIFFERENT METHODS OF EOEING IN THREE COUNTIES, 1955 TO 1959*
County
and
JreaT
Valley County
1955
1956
1957
1958
All years
Average
Fallon C o m t y
1955
1956
1957
1953
Aaount of
Eown
dis|c
Per
stand established as tier cent of area sown
with
Soim
Sown all
dr-p I
broadcast
I-Sethodg
cent
Per cent
Per cent
77.1
50.6
91.9
40.6
O
71.2
45.4
77.1
28.1
87.8
41.6
64.8
59.8
50.6
58.9
62.6
57.2
_ _ _
100.0
20.9
54.6
100.0
17.9
O
O
100.0
20.2
24.9
75.5
57.6
63.9
5.7
17.9
22.4
54.6
1956
1957
1928
86.5
57.2
55.8
mmtm
0
—
86.5
55.9
55.8
All years
66.7
65.8
0
0
64.7
64.7
77.8
49.4
77.0
45.4
mmmm
40.7
77.8
46.1
72.5
45.6
62.6
62.4
56.7
50.S
59.5
60,5
All years
Average
«*' m
Toolo County
Average
Valley, Fallon and
Toole counties
1935
1956
1937
1928
All years
Average
* Source:
Tz-blee % C; and Q Appendix
9.9
41.7
■51for suspecting that a difference does exist between the different areas
because of differences in climate and soil.
The disk drill was used for seeding 86.2 per cent of the sample area,
and for the entire sample area a stand was established on 62.6 per cent of
the land sown with the disk drill in comparison with £6.7 per cent of that
sown broadcast.
In Valley County a stand wae established on 64.8 per cent
of the area sown with the disk drill In comparison
broadcast.
ith 50.6 of that sown
These figures for Valley County are given a slight upward bias
by the fact that a larger sample was obtained for each method for the year
1957, which appears to have been the best of the four years.
If the average
of the yearly per cent of success is taken, the figures of 59.8 per cent
success for drilling and £8.9 per cent for broadcasting are obtained.
These data indicate that by using the drill, these Valley County
farmers obtained a stand on from 60 to 65 per cent of the area sown from
9
1955 to 1958.
Just how closely this rate of success approximates the suc­
cess that can be expected under normal climatic conditions is a matter of
conjecture.
It should be pointed out that (a) some of these farmers may
have become discouraged and plowed up the field before the seed had had
proper chance to germinate,9
10
9.
It might be argued, however, that it is
Charles E. Jarrett, County Extension Agent of Valley County, estimates
that a stand has been established on bout 2/3 of the acres which have
been sown to crested wheatgress in the county. Correspondence, Novem­
ber 16, 1929.
10. County Agent H. R. Etucky states that "stand ill be established on
practically 100 per cent of all seedings in Fergus County if given 5
years before farmers get disgusted and plow the eeedinge up." (Corres­
pondence December 19, 1959) Although this is probably an overstatement
(because of the hazards listed above), it hae some bearing on the point
under discussion,
-
52-
"nor- al" for farrore to do that very thing*11
seeaou
(b) Sone of this grass was
...n the fall of 1938 and might yet be awaiting proper conditions for
germination,
(e) The average precipitation for the 4 years for which
these data were collected was slightly below n o r m l , although that for
Ivvo was considerably above normal.
Tlie lmsards to success in crested
wheatgrass seeding would probably be reduced by additional precipitation.
If It is assumed on the basis of tills information that a stand can
be expected normally to be established on about 2/3 of the seedlings in
Valley County, then it will be necessary to increase the estimated seeding
P-0A t 2 g r &cro by l/g for the purpose of planning in order t o allow for risk
due to the ltaeards connected with sowing crested wheatgrass.
The Time .loncnt
'ost exports say that now grass seeding should have total protection
the first gracing season1
12* and some say preferably 2 years, depending on
1
the stand.1"
This allows the seedlings to become firmly established.
They
mean, of course, a period of protection beginning not from t h e time of
planting but
11.
12.
II*
Cron the tine the seeds germinate.
It is quite possible that
Itm IZay I M g h t related (Interview, December 22, 1938, at Jhntaua State
College) that his brother, who at one tine raised about Iialf the crested
Tdieutgrass seed in Montana, had been telling farmers for years not to
get excited but to give the grass tine to cone in* Then after waiting
two years hlnsolf on a 60 aero field of crested wheatgrass seeding, lie
decided it was no good and plowed half of it up before the ground Croto
the fall. The next spring he had a good stand of crested w h e a t ‘rass
on the remaining SO acres.
Crencr, Arthur, Op. Cit., p. 27.
HOitt9 Bell, and Tower, Created -heatgrass in Ilonteaae LSontana Agricul­
tural Experiment Station/ ^ oEormn, fontana,"TuY. 52/,' IS SC, p. 27.
moisture conditions will be such that the seeds will lie dormant the first
season or longer and come up when sufficient moisture Ie present.
the advice, "Don't get excited.
Hence
Give it time."
In the questionnaire the farmers were asked, "If a stand was estab­
lished, did it come up the first year or second year?"
For the Z counties
69.9 per cent of the successful seeding by disk drill came up the first
year, 23.6 per cent the second year, and 6.5 per cent the third year.14
(fee table VIII)
Of successful broadcast seeding for the same area 35.9
per cent came up the first year and 66.1 per cent came up the second year.
These figures agree quite well with those for Valley County which are 62.9
per cent the first year, 28.9 per cent the second year, and 8.2 per cent
the third year for disk drill seeding, and 35.2 per cent the first year
and 64.8 per cent the second year for broadcast seeding.
If we a s s w o that each seeding should have total protection for just
one season after it germinates, then by taking a weighted average of the
time required to get the grass in the sample up, we find the average amount
of protection required, from the time the grass is seeded, is 1.37 seasons
for disk drill seedings and 1,66 seasons for broadcast seedings in the
three counties.
For Valley County only, the corresponding figures are 1.45
seasons and 1.65 seasons respectively.
It must be pointed out here again
that since the date were taken in December, 1959, the fall seeding of 1937
and spring seeding of 1958 has had only two seasons to come in, and the
14.
Fall seeding which came up the following summer was considered to have
come up the first year.
54TABLE VIII.— TIME REQDIItED FOR CRESTED BREATGHASG TO COME DP
OS SOGOESSFDL SEEDINGE
Sample Area, 1955 to 1958
County and
method of sowing
Ceuae up
first year
Cacte up
second year
Cesac up
third year
per cent
per cent
per cent
62.9
55.2
28.9
64.8
8.2
0
84.1
0
0
100.0
15.9
0
84.8
15.0
0.2
69.9
53.9
23.6
66.1
6.5
0
Valley County
Sown with disk drill
Sown broadcast
Fallon Comtgr
Sown with disk drill
Sown broadcast
Toole Cotmty
Sown with disk drill
Valley, Fellon end
Toole counties
Sown with disk drill
Sown broadcast
fell seeding of 19S8 hae had only one season.
Possibly e small per cent of
the area reported as having no stand may yet come in, which, as has been in­
dicated on page 52, would increase slightly the rate of success to be ex­
pected, and would also lengthen slightly the average length of required
protection.
Even though it be protected for a season after it germinates, a maxi­
mum stand is not often obtained the first year.
crested
"Most of the growers of
hestgrase throughout the state," writes Hansmeier,1 ^ "give it as
their opinion that it is next to impossible.- to obtain a good stand the first
year after seeding.... The method usually followed is to allow the thin
stand obtained the first year to reseed itself, and thus secure a maximum
stand in from three to five years, depending on climatic conditions.*
A tabulation of information given by 15 farmers in articles printed
in The Montana Farmer indicates that only one got a good stand In one year,
7 got a good stand in 2 years, 6 got a good stand in £ years, and one got a
good stand in 4 years.
The average length of time required to produce what
was considered a good stand was about 2f years.
Since most of this sample
was grown for seed or hay, this probably is a low figure, especially for
abandoned crop land.
In view of the fact that an average of about 1.45 years complete pro­
tection is required for drilled seedlngs and
m average of something over
years Is required to obtain a good stand, it is necessary to Include
15*
Hansmeier, M. P., Pocsibllltlfca of Crested ITheatgraas for Reseeding
Montana's Range land. B. E. Thesis, Montana State College, p. SO.
—56—
S i Ic&Lt 5
time ae en element of cost of artificial revegetation with
crested ^heatgrnee.
T^iat are the eltuents of time coete?
classifications:
(a) Interest on investment in reseeding end (b) land
charges (interest and taxes).
stances is certain.
is bj
They may be divided into two
That interest rates will vary with circum­
If the money invested (either in seeding or in land)
iowedj then it it; a simple matter to enter this interest payment as
a cost.
If the farmer is Investing Ids own money, he till be guided to a
certain extent by whether or not its use affords him a ranch unit which will
be a home and means of obtaining security.
the investment in reseeding
Whatever the interest cost
on
is, it will be considered during the tv.o years
time as a part of the investment in the future yearly forage value.
If the
lend is in private ownership, the taxes and interest charges for these two
years will also be a part of the reseeding investment.
Fencing, Water Development, and Other Improvements
In cases where it is necessary to make improvements additional to re­
seeding in order to utilize the pasture, these must be considered as part
of the investment in the enterprise.
The need for and cost of these im­
provements will vary with different circumstances.
The reseeded ares may be situated within an existing ranch unit so
16.
These calculi-tions are based on the assumption that the seeding is
complete, or solid. When the seed price is high, it may be more economial to sow in strips, substituting time costs for seeding costs,
especially in cases where time costs are relatively low. A period of
5 to 10 years would be required to establish a stand, depending on the
width of the strips.
-57that it may need no other improvements to be utilised or it may comprise a
new unit and require a complete set of improvements.
keeping accurate records of cost of fencing in Rosebud county,
the Agricultural Adjurtment Administration found that a three-,ire fence
could be built for approximately SlOO per mile when they used labor at $40
per month end cut their own posts near the fence line.
17
The contract price
for three-wire fence in that area is about $150 according to Mr. Brewster.
With wire at
per rod and poets at IOf each, the cost of these two items
would be $80, which indicates that the cost of new fence would be something
over $100 when labor is added.
Saunderson and Monte (1956) found the cost
of a fence constructed with three lines of barbed wire on poets two rods
apart with a stay between, to be about $125 per mile.
Cost of
d e v e lo p m e n t
d e p th
W P te r d e v e lo p m e n t ,
which might be a well, a reservoir,
of a natural watering place, will vary a
of well required, kinds
and
g re a t
o r
deal with the
amount of material used, and the amount
of work required.
The cost of these necessary improvements, whether they are ne? in­
vestments or are already present and incorporated in land values, may be
prohibitive in some areas.
According to Eamtierson, nThe cost of fencing
the exterior boundaries of a township (56 sections) of range land with a
three-wire fence, and making the necessary water developments and other1
8
7
17. Brewster, Burton, Montana State Range Examiner, Agricultural Adjustment
Administration, Interview, Bozeman, Montana, February 28, 1940.
18. Saunderson, M. H., and Monte, N. W,, Grazing Districts in M o n U n a t
Their Purpose end Organization Procedure, Bui, 526, Montana Agricul­
tural Experiment Station, Bozeman, Montana, 1956, p, 24.
Irprovenente for ranee mnageaent, will anount to 5 250 to t400 per section.
R fine that the coat of inprovvru.nts for a large scale use of range
oi
the value of fifth, grade and roat of the value of
fourth grade range lands.
There Is consequently not ranch Incentive to pri­
I fmcr-
absorb all
vate individuals to own these lower grades of range lands, even when the
taxes are adjusted to as low as
$6 to .12 per section."19
’."ith the cost of new Inprovcnonts or repairs needed to utilise the
area ranging frors nothing to several hundred dollars per section, it is Inpoeslble to compute an avers e cost far tlien.
In order to set up a model
e&ee It will suit our purpose slnply to assume a cost of n e w Iwpynw MMn 11$
or reimirs to be $100 per section or 16^ per acre.
ID. Gaundorson, H. H., .cono~.dc Cluui q b in liontana *s Livestock Production,
Bui. 511, l ontana Agricultural IikpbrirxntwTlaitloii, hogervan', '
Iebnmr^r, 1956, p. 24.
-.cO-
A MODEL CASE, DDING VALLEY COUNTY DATA
Description of Area
Having analysed the costs of establishing crested vsheatgrase pasture
and the value of the pasture, it remains to demonstrate by use of a model
case a method of determining the economic feasibility of artificial reseed­
ing.
Because it contains s large amount of abandoned crop land and consti­
tutes & typical problem area from the standpoint of land use planning.
Valley County v?as chosen for more intensive study in order to obtain data
for setting up a realistic model case.
The description which follows is
intended to indicate the type of information which should be at hand for
land use planning purposes.
Physical Charscterlsties.— A description of the physical features
alone will do much to explain lend use in certain parts of Valley County,^
The county is drained by the Missouri River and by the Milk River, which
flows southeastward across the county from & central point on its west
boundary to join the Missouri River about 22 miles from the east boundary
of the county.
wThe surface north of the Milk River consists mainly of
secondary plains developed below the original upland plateau, a portion of
which still remains in the northeast quarter of the county.
Along the
drainage channels of that area the surface generally is rough.
South of
the Milk River the surface is rough, with only relatively small areas of
smooth land occurring mainly in what are now abandoned channels of eitherI
.
I.
For location of Valley County, refer to figure I.
ths !!Hk end Hlesotari rivers or w r y nacli lergor tribnterlco of these
strotr ss than ere now found thore.®2
^ l l £ e ~ * e?hc Soil of
the nplond pitsIn is a
6 ^ocn to 8ftr^ y los® etructuro
^hon;
the
with considerable
looial neteriels have
bet®
removed hy
cell Sn general is a clay to clay Iooa."*^
glacial
Eatoriol
laving
grerol Sn eo?.a plecoe.
post
glacial erosion, the
Tho following is a description
o f the different soil types In the county, as shown in the
acoompeaying
soil nap:^
(I) Dazilols loans are the soils on the high gravelly table or benches
^ ie northeast part of Valley CtRmty,
Thoy are classed as very
dart: ,;rayis]j-browi far isg soil — dark because of organic natter,
Thoir smooth surface, fertility end water holding capacity cause
them to rank enonr the best soil types in Sorthcast 'ont&ca,
clueive grain growing is the most c o m o n t po o f farming.
S x-
This
soil is quite satisfactory for or sted w h s a t g r a m ,
(*"' -iCO-iCvr loans are found in the secondary plains, Eiostly north of
the U U k Elver.
Those ere lighter colored soils.
They arc suit­
able for f a m i n g hut are less productive than the Daniels loans
and arc apt to be abandoned after a dry period.
2.
3.
4.
These soils in
Aldous, A. E,, and Deeds, J. F., Land Clasoillcatlon of the Tortliorn
rout ilalns, United States D ^ a r & e n t " o f "interior oSIc I c a i Purvey,
V a A d n B G S T D . C., 1925, p. 73.
p. 73.
S c d o a r i M d Chess "loeokcr, ! orris, Stralma and Tanifold, S o U
urvey
( i c c o ^ d o s c n c e u of the E o r t h u m llalns of Montana, D u r o a T T r tn ^ I s try
ooc noils in Cooperation with Montana Agricultural ...acporiixnt Station.
Series 1929, S». 21.
-61VALLEY COUNTY
R3S
R36
R37
R38
R39
R4 0
R 41
R42
LEGEND
r-fel BAlNVlLLE LOAMS
I -ICHEYENNE GRAVELLY
I IDANIELS LOAMS
LOAMS
I ISCOBY SANDY LOAMS
EZZl SCOBY STONY LOAMS
C Z l SCOBY LOAMS
C D LlSMAS CLAY LOAMS
PHILLIPS LOAMS
EZZ
EZZ
I'
I I
PIERRE CLAY LOAMS
I
C Z ALLUVIAL SOILS,CUNDIFFERENTIATEDD
BADLANDS
' BADLANDS BASINS
I O R M A N C LAY L O A M S
FIGURE 6.— SOILS OF VALLEY COUNTY*
* Source:
Gieseker, et. al. (See footnote 4, page 60)
-62North Valley County have a tendency to drift after the grase eod
I b destroyed.
On these soils stands of crested wheatgraes may
be expected.'
(S) Ecobey ctoney loams are much like Ecobey loams excepting the
presence of large quantities of boulders and gravel Tvhich make
much of it untillable.
(4) Phillips loams are characterized by numerous depressed bare
spots which are locally knorn ae "slick spots", " blowouts", or
"scab land".
Bare spots cover 20 to 60 per cent of areas mapped
as Phillips loams.
At a depth of about 9 inches on the average
is a tough heavy clay pan.
On these soils the possibility of
getting a stand of crested wheatgrass is decreased.
(5) Bainville loams are shallow Immature soils overlaying sandstone
and shales.
Erosion has removed all or a large part of the gla­
cial drift and a thin soil has developed on shale or sandstone.
The greater part of this land is too broken for cultivation.
The tillable land within 50 miles of the railroads was broken
early and later a large acreage was abandoned.
Much soil blow­
ing takes place as soon as root fibers are destroyed.
Grama end
niggerwool form the principal native cover.
(6) Pierre clay loams are olive-brown silty clay loams or silty clay,
compact when dry but sticky and plastic when ret.
Below £ feet
are abundant crystals of gypsura and fragments of slate-colored
5.
Barmen, Kenneth
Junior Soil Conservationist, Malta, Montana.
respondence, November 2, 1959.
Cor­
-
shale.
65-
The surface is mostly rolling, rounded hills tnd ridges
in which streams have cut ratner aeeply.
these soils is used only for grazing.
Grama grows in bunches.
fairly well.
The great r part of
The grass cover is scant.
In Bolster areas native v.’:eat grass does
On the whole, the grazing value is low,
(7) Lismss clay loams are a raw and unweathered phase of Pierre clay
loams..
The surface soil is shallow and there is little accumu­
lation of organic matter.
These soils have a very broken relief
and are used only for grazing.
The scanty cover of vegetation
consists of black sage, greesewood and isolated plants of west­
ern wheatgr&ss.
These heavy clays ere the poorest grazing soils
in northeast Montana and livestock are run on them only when
water holes are filled.
(8) Bad lands.
On these areas excessive erosion
nd dissection of
soft rocks have produced a bare and rugged landscape, the deso­
late appearance of which is relieved here and there by filled
in valleys.
Those badlands cover the breaks along the Missouri
River, are not suitable for cultivation, and are used only for
grazing.
Black sage, -greasewood and e spares growth of western
wheatgrass comprise the meager vegetation on shale areas, and
grams and associated species cover the sandstone and sandy shale
areas.
The livestock-carrying capacity is vary low.
(9) Badland basins are locally known as "alkali flats*.
about 90 square miles in Louth Valley County.
They cover
The soil consists
of raw soil material which is mostly wash from the shale hills.
-
64—
It is nsoptly bare of vegetation, except patches of.spares black
sago, salt Bije, ehadecelo, pricklypecr <nd groaseisood.
The salt
sage has some forage value and the area I b grazed a little when
water is available.
The roil'is worthless for cultivation.
(10) The lighter alluvial soils and the Scobey sandy loams are prob­
ably suitable for crested whestgrass if they are not utilized
otherwise.
On numbers (l), (£), (Z), and (10) stands of crested wheatgr&ss can
be expected as far as soil Is concerned.
On numbers (4), (5), (6),
end (7)
the possibilities of getting stands are decreased increasingly in the order
given.
On number (9) and most of number (8) it is doubtful that crested
g
Trheetgrass would grow at all.
Climate.— The precipitation in Valley County
inches during a normal year.
I
b
approximately
1Z.E
The Sc year record et Glasgow, up to and in­
cluding 1930, was 15.4£ inches yearly and 9.71 seasonal (April I to Sep­
tember SO).
The average length of the frost free period at Glasgow is 121
days, the ZS year record showing May 20 to be the average date of last
killing frost in the spring and September 18 to be the average date of the
first killing frost in the- fall.
The growing season Is c few days shorter
in the northern part of the County.
The average yearly temperature is
40.7 degrees end the average seasonal temperature [April I to September 50)
7
over a 54 year period ending with 1950, is 59.7 degrees.
3.
7.
Hermen, Kenneth W . , Pa. Cit.
Reitz, L. P., Crop Regions in Montana as Related to Environmental Fac­
tors. Bui. 540, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, Bozeoen, Montana,
May, 1957, Appendix Tables I, 2 and 5.
Ltuio Cl^bsl-Ilcatlon w m
Dee.-—Of the L #r.27t000 ecree in Vulley County#
685,000 acres, or 16.2 per cent were d e s e e d as crop Ianu in 1258
table IX) end 2,712,000 acres us non-crop pasture laud.
(.
This figure for
crop land is 101,025 acres below that given for 1929 by the 1950 census,
uhich indicates that over 100,000 acres net of crop land has bean abandoned
since 1929.
This is In addition to other land which was abandoned in the
early 1020's, particularly on the Scoboy loans and Bainvilie soil types,®
end wiiich still will not have obtained complete cover of good native grasses.
The status of the 155,858 acres of idle crop land is questionable.
Expe­
rience has shown that with more favorable rainfall or wheat prices much of
it v ill be plowed . gain even though much of it may be submarginal from the
normal, or long time, viewpoint.
In 1958, t’
ae Agricultural Adjustment Administration had designated
42,206 acres es restoration land (44,890 for 1940) and 50,000 acres had
been sown to ereetea wheatgrass by 1959.
Valley county has two cooperative grazing districts which include
all but the east central section of the county.
These arc the "North Val­
ley" grazing district, which takes in over one-half the area north of the
Milk River, and the "Bad Lands" district, Uhich takes in practically ail
the area south of the Milk River.
In 1936 these districts were comprised
of 1,4.04,325 acres of range land, most of which is publicly or nod (fee
table X), and the members of the districts owned or leased 692,587 acres
of commensurate property.
8.
9.
Includes crop land, fallow, and idle crop land.
Gieeeker, Morris, Ctraham and Manifold, Po. Cit.. pp. £2 and 57.
table
n .—
vallei county lan d u s e ,
LuDd use
Acres
ToteI land area
Crop land
Under A.A.A. contract
In crop
Idle lend
Fallow
Outside of A.A.A. contrect
(estimated)
Non crop pasture D n d
m e
Per cent
5,257,000
100.0
525,000
16.2
492,971
95.9
£57,504
155,858
79,609
62.2
51.6
16.2
$2,029
6.1
2,712,000
85.8
•—67—
TABLE I.— -LAND CLASSIFIED AS TO OWNERSHIP
Valley County Cooperative Grazing Districts, 1956*
North
Valley
District
Bi dlands
District
Total
142,465
615,678
758,145
17,492
22,867
40,559
£41,979
109,298
451,277
County land
50,000
2,210
52,210
Hon resident
55,127
47,199
102,526
607,075
797,252
1,404,525
Ormed
189,910
102,088
291,998
Leased
294,176
106,415
400,589
Total
484,086
208,501
692,587
Ownership
Range land in district
Public domain
State land
Federal repurchase
Total
Coia;ii«ieurate property
* Source: Scundcrson, M. H., and Monte, H. U., Grazing Districts in
Montam.. Their Purpose end Organization Procedure. Bui. 526, Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station, Bozeman, Montana, September, 1956,
Table I, pp. 2£ and 25.
-GQMoet ox the aree of the Be two districts wee covered by the coopera­
tive Western Range Survey in 1957.
figure 7), 180,575 have been plowed.
listed by the
Of the 1,952,747 acres surveyed (See
Of this plowed lend, 77,993 scree Ie
7e s t c m Range Survey as agricultural land and 102,582 acres
as abandoned crop land.
Figures 7 and 8 show the distribution of plowed
land and abandoned lend in the area by townships.
parative
Figure 9 shows the com­
razing capacity of the native range in the area by townships.
I comparison of these aith figure 6 (Soils nap) will show a close correla­
tion between soil types and grazing capacity and land use.
In thi IiiJit of the analysis of costs and value of artificial re­
seeding which has been made in Parts II and III, it should be possible to
apply the data from the
astern Range Curvey and information from soils and
land classification studies to a specific area and determine the feasibi­
lity of artificial revegetation on that area.
ft Model Case
For a model case, an area 18 miles long and 14 miles wide in the
central part of the county will be used.
(See figure 10)
boundary of the area is about Iy miles north of Glasgow.
The southern
Porcupine Creek
forms its east boundary and Cherry Creek drains the central part.
Figure
10 shows land use on the area in 1957 as found Iy the Cooperative Western
Range Survey.
The area is outlined in heavy lines in the center of
figures 6, 7, 8 end 9.
Value.— Practically all of the 18,940 acres of abandoned crop land
in this area is on soil mapped as Ecobey loams and on land classified es
— 69—
VALLEY COUNTY
R35
R 36
R37
R38
R39
T 3 ‘r
T 36
R40
R 41
R42
T37
::
I:
I
r
AREA
T36
R43
T35
R45
[ • ’• '
rv
m
NOT
v
T30
E
T28
T30
h
:
T28
SURVEYED
T 26
LEGEND
I IN O
GZ3
PLOWED LAND
I
~
I O O O ACRES
KZ3 IOOO-
2000
£ 3 2000-
4 0 0 0 ACRES
S 3
6000 ACRES
4000 -
B E gooo - eooo
ACRES
acres
8 000 - IOOOO ACRES
FIGURE 7.— AMOUNT OF PLOWED LAND (ABANDONED LAND AND CROP LAND)
BY TOWNSHIPS IN THE VALLEY COUNTY AREA COVERED BY THE
WESTERN RANGE SURVEY, 1957*
♦Source of Data:
Western Range Survey Form WRS-5, Valley County
-70VALLEY COUNTY
R 35
R36
R37
R38
R39
R40
R4I
R42
FIGURE 8.— AMOUNT OF ABANDONED LAND BY TOWNSHIPS
IN THE VALLEY COUNTY AREA COVERED BY THE. WESTERN RANGE SURVEY, 1957*
♦Source of Data:
Western Range Survey Form WRS-3, Valley County.
FIGURE 9.— COMPARATIVE GRAZING CAPACITY BY TOWNSHIPS
IN THE VALLEY COUNTY AREA COVERED BY THE WESTERN RANGE SURVEY, 1957*
♦Source of Data:
Western Range Survey Form WRS-5, Valley County
•72-
FIGURE 10.— LAND USE ON VALLEY COUNTY AREA USED FOR MODEL CASE*
*Source:
Type Map, Cooperative Western Range Survey.
second grade farm land.
The native range lends adjoining the plowed land
is c l iselfled as second grade range lands.
Second grade range land, as
classified by the Agronomy Department, Montana Agricultural Experiment Sta­
tion, is that land of which 19 to 27 acres of land is required to pasture
a 1000 pound steer for a month grazing period.
If we use the average, 28
acres per animal imit, as representative of second grade grazing land, then
2,2 acres are required per animal month of feed, or each acre produced
.455 animal months of feed.
This is a much higher carrying capacity than is given the area by
the Western Range Survey.
The survey was made in 1957 when the range was
suffering from the effects of severe drought years, and in some cases overgrazing, and allowance was made for recuperation.
Hence the carrying capa­
city as figured by the Western Range Survey from the data obtained probably
is not normal carrying capacity.
There is, however, logic in the conten­
tion of range experts that the range will yield a more stable and sustained
return and consequently, in the long run, a greater return if grazed more
conservatively than it has in the past been gr&zea.
It remains for us here
to accept the land classification of the Agronomy Department as the nearest
approach to normal capacity now available and suggest that the individual
who plans to reseed may well be conservative when he substitutes his own
figure for carrying capacity.
If we accept the figure of .455 animal months of feed per acre of
native range for our area, the ratio of crested wheatgrass productivity to
native range
to be 1.5 as estimated in Part II (page 56) and the lease
value of range to be 50# per animal month (see page 44), then the expected
74v r Iw
of crested id»atyr&ss pasture In our Broa can be computed as follows*
•4SS x 1.6 - .66 cnlr=i.l months per core of crested wheatjrass
.65
x 50/ » 19.5/ lease value per acre of crested v/he&trrase.
Cost.— (I) Let us assume first that the area is under private owner­
ship and that the land owner is asking the analysis.
The elements of cost of establishing pasture through artificial revegetation were set forth in Fart III as (a) seed, (b) seeding operations,
(c) the tine element, (d) allowuxse for risk and (e) fencing, eater developm n t and other improvements.
In the analysis of these costs a definite
figure was indicated for use in this model case in every Instance excepting
certain aspects of the tine element - namely, the cost of taxes, interest
on investment already in land, and the interest rate to be used.
Lord found (1936) that the tax per acre on second I^rude f & m land
in Valley County was 16/ and the assessed value per acre was
table XI)
8.40.10 (See
Obviously if our area is typical of second grade farming land in
Valley County, unless these costs can be adjusted when the land is changed
Ilror- f a m i n g to grazing, we need go no further, for those costs alone would
bo above the lease value of tho land.
If someone has #6.40, or even a sun
half that nuch, invested in the land, he will lave to take a loss.11
.
10
11*
Qn
Lord, -oward II., F a m Tax Burden, astore Thesis, Kontana State College,
Dozeoan, F o n t a n a ^a= Io' VI1 Appendix, p. 66.
Director Linfleld no int a out tN, I ® farmer nay figure himself very
little interest on his invest e: t for the reason that fee is providing
himself with a hone, a business, and security, and also because he would
likely find no other way to inv at his savin s as they accrue to him
tdiich would bo satisfactory. This argument is granted to be true, but
if, iiS is most often the case, the fer er has invested borrowed money,
tho interest is to bin a direct cost and must be accounted as such*
(Llnfield, F. B., Director Hneritus of Ijont&na Agricultural x p e r i m n t
Staticm, Bozeman. Interview at Bozeman, ■ontana, Deeombor, 1939.
E
TABLF XI.— ASSESSED VALUE ASB TAX LEVIED IS VALLEY COUNTY
BY GRADE OF LAID, 19£8 to 192%*
Assessed
value
ner acre
Grade of land
Tax
per
Farm land**
First grade
22 bu. or over
9.62
.22
Second grade
16 to 21 bu.
8.40
.16
Third grade
12 to 15 bu.
10.18
.20
Fourth grade
8 to H
4.75
.09
bu.
Grazing land***
First grade
18 acres or less
—
———
Second grade
19 to 27 acres
5.87
.11
Third grade
28 to £7 acres
5.44
8
e
Fourth grade
£8 to 55 acres -
4.10
.07
Fifth grade
56 acres or over
5.20
.06
*
Source* Lord, Hosard H., Farm Tas Burden. Maeters Thesis, Montsma
State College, Bozeman, Montana, Appendix, p. 42.
**
Graded as to yield of spring wheat on summer fallow.
*** Graded as to acres required for 1300 pound steer for 10 month period.
76second grade grazing land Lord found the tax to be 11* per acre end the
assessed value to be $5,87 per acre.
The assessed value, of course, has
little meaning, but It is assumed here that the tax on the land will be
at least 11# per acre.
For purpose of illustration we shall assume, also,
that there is an investment of at least $1.00 per acre v.ith an interest
rate of 5 per cent.
The time cost, then, will be 16* per year for these
items plus interest on the investment in seed and seeding operations.
Using these figures, then, and those indicated in Part III for the
other items, the cost per acre for establishing crested wheatgrass pasture
can be computed as followsI
Item
Cost oer Acre
(I) Seed
4 lbs. 9 15#
.60
(2) Drilling
@ 50# per acre
.50
(5) Time element
(2 years)
Interest on $1.00 investment in
land at 5^ per year
.10
Taxes at 11# per year
.22
Interest on seeding costs.
.05 x $1.10 per year
.11
.45
(4) Allowance for risk (Add & to above costs)
.76
(5) New improvements or repairs (assumed)
.16
Total
$2.45
At 5 per cent, the interest on an investment of $2.45 would be 12.2#.
If this is subtracted from the 19.5*, the lease value of the pasture, 7,2#
will be left for land charges, i.e., interest and taxes.
It becomes
-77iiomediately apparent that this return will not take care of the 16* land
charge which v/e have assumed in the computation.
more than the 7,5f return.
The H f
tax alone is
Hence we would have to conclude that under the
assumptions which we have specified, the project would not be feasible.
It is sometimes stated by tax students that a fair tax is one which
takes about l/S of the income from land.
1/5 x 19.5 = 6.5f.
If the tax
burden could be adjusted to this level, the cost of revegetation would be
9f less, the return for land charges would be increased by .4f and the
amount left for land investment vould be 1.2#.
This is not quite enough
for the #1.00 investment which we assumed in the computation of costs, but
is close enough that we would probably conclude that it was feasible to go
ahead.
The important thing to remember is that unless the return for land
charges is sufficient to cover those charges on the particular area, it
will be necessary either to get the charges adjusted or declare the pro­
ject not economically feasible.
Let us now examine the effect of government subsidy to private seed­
ing.
The Agricultural Conservation Program (Agricultural Adjustment Admin­
istration) for restoration land for 1940 allows for a restoration land
payment of 15# per acre each year until the restoration tract has been
restored to a permanent vegetative cover - two years in our case.
In addi­
tion, an allowance of 45# is made in 1940 which may be earned by soil
building practices, including reseeding.
If we consider this a 75# sub­
sidy for returning crop land to a permanent vegetative cover, then we can
subtract it from the $2.45 cost per acre which was computed.
the remaining 51.70 would amount to 8.5#.
Interest on
This subtracted from 19.5#
-78lease value would leave 11# for land charges.
same reasoning used in the last paragraph.
To this we would apply the
Oddly enough, if the "ideal"
tax situation were obtained, in this case, the amount left for investment
in land will pay 4j per cent interest on the 41,00 investment assumed
above in computing costs.
It should be pointed out again that crested wheatgrass has compara­
tively high value not only because of the amount of feed produced but be­
cause of its peculiar role in the ranch management plan.
Not only may the
cOji per animal month value which we have asstaaed be too low, but the entre­
preneur, especially if he invests his own money, may accept a very low rate
of interest return gladly if the investment s ill obtain for him a well
balanced ranch unit.
It can readily be seen that should the average value
per animal month of crested wheatgrass feed be found to be 45#, leaving
all the other values the same, the lease value per acre would be increased
by about 10#, which would amount to an added land value of about $2 per acre.
(2) Public ownership.
The costs under public ownership would differ
slightly and would be computed as followsi
Item
Cost per Acre
(1) Seed
4 lbs. § 15#
.60
(2) Drilling
S 50# per acre
,50
(5) Interest for 2 years on above items at
.07
(4) Allowance for risk, add £ to above
.60
(5) New improvements and repairs
.16
Total
$1.95
-79The government, especially the federal government, will probably
be able to get Jiioniy
owner.
tion.
at a lower r te of interest than could the private
For that reason a rate of S per cent was used in the above computa­
At 3 per cent, the interest on an investment of $1.83 is 6^.
On the
other hand, it is not likely that a fee would be charged which was nearly
as large as the 30# per animal month lease value used for the private owner.
As was indicated in Part II (page 43) less than half that amount was charged
in the Valley County grazing districts in 1936.
With only 10# per acre in­
come (about l/£ of 19.5#) a balance of 4# per acre would be returned in lieu
of taxes.
Some allowance must be made, of course, for administration.
From the standpoint of government activity, some consideration should
also be given to whet have been termed the "non pecuniary values" of grass
in addition to the return from grazing fees.
These may be said to have been
given concrete expression in the subsidies for restoration land.
The area from which data were used to build this model case is a rel­
atively good area, but we have discovered that even here the returns from
artificially established pasture will support only a very moderate lend
charge.
Since reseeding costs vary slightly with the different types of
soil. It is doubtful if much of the poorer land could be profitably reseeded
under private ownership unless the carrying capacity of crested whe&tgrase
relative to native range is considerably greater than we have assumed It to
be
-80-
SOMMAHS
and recommendations
for further study
Cuaatfery
The objective of this study was to develop & technique, a method of
analysis by which to determine the feasibility of artificial revegetation
on
BUhBMirginal
farm land.
Data were collected to permit an analysis of
costs of establishing crested wheatgress pasture and its value and to set
up
a
realistic model case.
The aim was not to draw conclusions concerning
the feasibility of artificial reveget&tion and none were d r a w except that
if the assumptions upon which the model case was built in part were true,
then only with certain land charges would artificial revegetation be
feasible.
It was found that over 2 million acres of crop land have gone out of
production in Montana between 1929 and 1919.
The Agricultural Adjustment
Administration designated 521,225.4 acres in Montana as restoration land in
1959.
Tlie estimated amount of crested wheatgrase on crop land in 59 coun­
ties was 569,707 acres in 1359.
Data from the Judith Basin Branch Station indicate that in the 6 year
period from 1954 to 1959, crested wheatgress yielded twice as much feed as
native range and that normally it will yield at least
If
times as much as
native range in that area.
The elements of cost of artificial reseeding were found to be (a)
seed, (b) seeding operation, (c) the time element, (d) allowance for risk,
and (e) cost of improvements made necessary,
seed cost is about 60# per acre.
At current seed prices the
Cost of drilling is about 50# per acre.
-31dependlng on the size and type of the outfit.
It was found that about two
years' time costs sust be allowed to get a stand on successful seedlngs and
th..t on only about 2/5 of the acreage planted from 1955 to 1355 was a stand
established.
The chief hasards to success in getting a stand of crested
wheatgrass are ¥,ind, drought, and grasshoppers.
There is soae correlation
between coil types and conditions and success in getting a stand.
Recommendations for Further Study
The method of analysis is of value in application only If certain
information is at hand.
It is necessary for more study to be made concern­
ing the forage yield of crested wheatgrt.se under different climetic condi­
tions and on different types and conditions of soil.
Although it may be
possible to express this expected yield as a ratio of the yield of native
range under like conditions, it is hardly likely that the same ratio will
apply to different conditions.
The ratio of 1.5 which was used in the
model case in this study is lower than the claims made for the grass by
many who have worked with it.
figure.
It was purposely held to a conservative
If experience proves it to be too low, it can be changed without
affecting the technique of analysis in the least.
Further study should be made on the value of the forage produced.
The value c.scribed to it in this study was a rough estimate of the market
value of the feed which it displaced.
The method used by some of compar­
ing the cost of reseeding with the market value of the extra pounds of beef
produced is not satisfactory because of the complementary costs of produc­
ing beef, such as labor and investment in livestock.
The value of the
forage will probably be found to vary with different areas.
The effect of the hazards of wine, grasshoppers and drought will
also vary -;ith different areas and more should be known of this in order
to decide on the feasibility of reseeding.
The returns from the question­
naire used in connection with this study indicated that there is some dif­
ference in the amount of success obtained in reseeding in Valley, Toole
and Fallon counties but the samples for Toole and Fallon counties were so
Siitall that no definite conclusions can be safely drawn as to the per cent
of success there.
Data peculiar to the area and conditions under consideration will
be needed concerning improvements necessary, seed costs, seeding operation
costs, and Interest and taxes.
County governments should devise a plan whereby taxes, which are
usually higher on land which has been farmed, may be adjusted to a rate
which the returns from pasture lend will justify.
This will help to put
some land which has been abandoned to weeds into a good use and also in­
sure a more stable and certain tax revenue.
Before the final word can be said concerning the economic feasi­
bility of artificial revegetation, it is necessary that much work be done
on the evaluation of the social considerations which justify public ex­
penditures for the purpose of getting a grass cover on either public or
private land, especially on important watersheds and on areas very sus­
ceptible to wind erosion.
-35-
Acma,u;DGmiiT
The author ie indebted to Profeesor G* II. Crair of tlie Departeent
of Agricultural Econonice for criticising this thesis and for nany help­
ful suggestions in organlsinr it and in the analysis, and to Dr. R. EU
Renne of the Depart cut of Agricultural Econcsnics and Dr. Ierrill 0.
Burlinrane of the Department of History for their helpful criticisms of
the manuscript.
Ackncwledgncnt is due also to A.
II. Post, IU
.iirolc! Abel, and L. C. Hurfct for their helpful cooperation in
D. .Mercer,
data
available.
Tho author wishes also to acknowledge tee assistance of the Vtbrk
Projects Administration, Project Humber 0. p. 65-1-91-40 (?.. p. 5029 ) in
the compilation of the data and the preparation o f the charts and naps
used in this thesis.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Publl cations
Aldous, A. Es t and Deeds, J . F., Land Classification of the N o r t h a m
Great Plains. Montana. North Dakota. Eouth Dakota » and Pyouinz.
Iilraeographed, tJ. £. Department of Interior, Geological Surrey,
Washington, D. C., 1929.
Allen, William, The Utilization gf Merainal Land. Bui. 476, Cornell
University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, Ner York,
May 1929.
Bean, Louis H., Gavin, J. P,, Means, Gardner C., "The Causes: Price
Relations and Economic Instability," Dolls and M e n . 1958 Year­
book of Agriculture, U. 8. Department of Agriculture, Washington,
D. C., p p . 171 - 197.
Black, J. D., "To Analyze Lend Utilization from the Standpoint of a
Product - Ordinarily a Product Produced on the Extensive Mar,.in,"
Scops and Method Eerics. Bui. 2, Eocisl Science Research Council,
New York, 1951, pp. 161 - 162.
Boatright, Willlsa C., Erosion and Related Land Use Conditions on t? e
Froid Demonstration Pro.iect. Montana„ U. S. Department of Agri­
culture, Washington, D. C., 1958.
Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. E. D. A,, The Land Utilization
Program for the Northern Great Plains. Northern Great Plains
Region, Land Utilization Program, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D. C., 1959.
Clapp, Earle H., Munne, E. N., Sims, I. H., Weturwein, George £., and
Clayton, C. F., "The Remedies: Policies for Public Lends," Soils and
Men. 1958 Yearbook of Agriculture, U. £. Department of Agricul­
ture, Washington, D. C., pp. £25 - 240.
Clayton, C. F., "Local Land Utilization Studies in Relation to Prob­
lems of Rural Economic Organization," Journal of Far..L Economics.
Vol. XIV, No. 4, October, 1952, pp. 662 - 678.
Cramer, Arthur,
Inventory of the Range Resources in Petroleum County,
Montana. with sn Analysis of the Range Problems and Rscoa^endatlons for their Solution. Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station, Missoula, Montana, July I, 1958.
Gray, L. C., "The Social and Eccanomlc Implications of the National Land
Program," Journal of Farm Economics. Vol. XVIII, No. 2, May, 1956.
-3511.
Giescker, L. F., Morris, E. R., Etrehorn, A. T., end Manifold, C. B.,
of
Morthvrn Plains of Monona. Series 1929, No.
£1, Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, U. £. Department of Agricul­
ture, Washington, D. G., in Cooperation with the Montana Agri­
cultural Experiment Station.
1^.
Gray, L. C., Problems of Obtaining the Best Use of Lands. Mimeographed
Address, given before Extension Service Staff, Washington, D. C.,
December 14, 1957.
12.
Gray, L. C., and Regan, Mark, "Needed Points of Development and Re­
orientation in Land Economic Theory," Journal of Far . Economics.
Vol. IXII, February 1940, pp. 5 4 - 4 6 .
14.
Kvneaeier, M. P., P o I ojlitie s of Crested Wheat gras s for Reseeding
Montana ru.nge Lands. B. S. Thesis, Montana State College, Bozeman.
Montana, 1926.
15.
Johnson, Niel
and Samidersan, M. H., Tvoes of !arming in Montana.
Part I, Bui. 528, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station in co­
operation with Division of Farm Management end Costs, Bureau of
Agricultural Economics, U. £. Department of Agriculture, October,
16.
Kirk, L. E., Stevenson, I. M., and Clarke, S. L., Crested Vheat Orest.
Publication £92, Farmer1s Bulletin 44, Department of Agriculture,
Dominion of Canada, September, 1927.
I/.
Landis, Paul H., "Probable Social Effects of Purchasing Submrginal
Land in the Great Plains," Journal of Farm Economics. Vol. XVII,
Mo. It August, 1955, pp. 512 - 521.
18.
Lord, Hovard H., Far . Tax Burden. Master's Thesis, Montana State
College, Bozeman, Montana, 1926.
19.
Melchers, Leo Edt?., Grasses in Kansas. Report of Kansas State Board
of Agriculture, Topeka, Kansas, 1956.
20.
Mercer, Ralph D., Montana Extension Agronomist Yearly Report, Bozeman,
Montana, 1959.
£1.
National Land Use Planning Committee and National Advisory and Legisla­
tive Committee on Land Use, The Problems of Eubasrtrin- I Aret ?,.
Desirable Adjustments with Particular Reference
Public
Acquisition of Land, Publication No. 6 for this Committee, U. E.
GovernmentPrTnting Office, Washington, D. C.
22.
Peterson, G. M., and Galbraith, J. K., "The Concept of Marginal Land,"
Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. XIV, No. 2, April 1952, pp. 295 -
-862S.
Reitz, L .
Bell, M. A., and Tower, H. E., Crested RheataraeE in
BuX• 225# Montana State College Agricultural Experl—
aent Station, Bozeman, Montana, June, 1956.
24•
rtelta^ L.
£ £ 2 2 ILe^lone in Montana aa Related to Environmental
Bol. 540, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station,
Bozeman, Montana, May, 1927.
<5.
Renne, R. R., "Significance of the Ownership Pattern to Land Use
Planning," J g u x m l of F a m Economics. Vol. XVII, August, 1955.
pp. 425 - 452.
'
t.G.
Lenne, R. R., "To Determine the Lost Advantageous Distribution of the
^ n d UtiGE of an Area as Between Extensive Grazing and Farming
(Adapted to Semi-arid Regions)," Scope and Method Series. Bui.
2, Social Science Research Council, New York, 1921, pp. 157 - 1 4 4 .
17.
Ramie,
28.
Renne, R. R., and Lord, H. H., Montana Farm Taxes. Clr. 94, Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station, Bozeman, Montana, June, 1928.
<c9.
Samdcrson, M. H e, £ Method for the Valuation of Livestock RmnnR
Properties, Mimeo. Cir. 6, Montana Agricultural Experiment Sta­
tion, Bozeman, Montana, March I, 13.8.
23.
Saunderson, a. H., Economic Changes in Montana's Livestoor. Production.
Bui. 211, Montana state College Agricultural Experiment Station,
Bozeman, Montana, February, 1926.
21.
caunderson, ;. H., and vhiteenden, D. ?<., Cattle Ranchinr in Montana.
Bui. 341, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, Bozeman,
Montana, May, 1937.
32.
Saunderson, M. H., and Monte, N. I., Grazing Districts in Mggtana:
Their Purpose agg Organization Procedure. Bui. 226, Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station, Bozeman, Montana, Eept., 1326.
c..
S a m d e r son, M. H., and Vlnke, Louie, The Economics of Range Sheep Pro­
duction in Montano, Bui. 202, Montana Agricultural Experiment
Station, Bozeman, Montana, June, 1925.
54.
Senate Document No. 199, £he Western Range. U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. C., 1926.
55.
Starch, E. A., L.nd Use Planning in Montana. Mimeo. Cir., Department
of Agricultural Economics, Montana State College, Feb. 15, 1954.
R. R., Ejio Ov.m- montane's Land? Iliaeo. Cir. 15, Montana Agri­
cultural Experiiaent Station, April, 1959.
-87£6,
Starch, E. A., Montane'e Dry-Land Agriculture. Bui. 518, Montane Agri­
cultural Experiment Station, Bozeman, Montana, April, 1956.
a7.
Stuber, B. R,, "Capitalization of Fcx Realty Income ee a Basis of
Valuation,w Scope egd Methpq Series. Bui. 19, Sociel Science Re­
search Council, Ne$ York, 1955, pp. 75 - 78.
58.
Stevenson, T. M., Clarke, S. L., and Maels&ac, F. M., Seeding Crested
Thcat Grass igr gay
Paetur.;. Publication 557, Fanner's Bui.
28, Department of Agriculture, Dominion of Canada, Ottawa, April,
1859, Third Printing.
59.
Stewart, George, RGEecding Range Land:= ol the Intermount; In Region,
Fanacr1s Bulletin 1825, 0. £. Department of Agriculture, July,
1959.
40.
Thone, Frank, "Prairie Grass Roots," Science. Vol. 85, No. £196,
January 29, 1957, Supplement p. 8,
41.
KiecddLag, E. H., "Relation of Farm Realty Income to Values," S c o p s
Gno Method Series. Bui. 19, Social Science Research Council, New
York, 1955, pp. 45 - 46.
42*
Iilson, M. L., Land Utilization, an Address, lconomic Series Lecture
No. 25, Delivered over N. B. C. National Network, April 16, 1952,
Uaiversity of Chicago Press, April, 1952.
Correspondence and Inter-views
1.
Abel, Harold, State Statistician, Agricultural Adjustment Administration,
Bozeman, Montana, Interview, December 28, 1959.
2.
Brewster, Burton, Montsna State Range Examiner, Agricultural Adjustment
Adffiinistrstion, Bozeman, Montana. Interview, February 28, 1940.
5.
Haight, Ray, State Representative of the Bureau oi Agricultural Economics,
Division of State ana Local Planning, Bozeman, Montana. Interview,
December 22, 1859,
4 . Barmen, Kenneth I?., Junior Soil Conservationist, Malta, Montcna.
Corres­
pondence, November 5, 1959.
5.
Jarrett, Charles E., County Extension Agent, Valley County, Glasgow,
Montaru . Correspondence, November 16, 1959.
6.
Linfield, F. B., Director Emeritus of Montana Agricultural Experiment
Station, Bozeman, Montana. Interview, December, 1353.
Spaulding, Curtie J., Soil Conservation Service, Project Manager,
Roundup, Montana. Correspondence, November 12, 1929.
Sterling, R, N., County Extension Agent, Roosevelt County, Culbertton,
Montana. Correspondence, December 13, 1329.
Gt Ucky, H. R«, County Extension Agent, Fergus County, Lenistown,
Montana. Correspondence, December 19, 1929.
Zeidler, Gib, County Extension Agent, Fallon and Carter counties.
Baker, Montana. Correspondence, November 21, 1929.
-93APPENDIX /..— QUESTIONNAIRE W I C H WAf MAILED TO £00 FAEMEIiE
IN VALLEY, FALLON AND TOOLE COUNTIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF
OBTAINING DATA ON CliESTED KHEATGRASS SfZDINGS.
(A double poetel card
bsb
used.)
Dear Mr. Joneei
As c part of a study to determine the cost of restoring
cropped land to pasture by sowing crested Bheatgraes, we wish
to find the probability of getting a stand under actual farm
conditions.
Risk of failure is an element of cost, so a report on
failure to get a stand is as important as one of success.
Your experience will be very helpful, and we will be
grateful if you will fill out the attached card and return
it.
Yours very truly.
I.
Acres of crested wheetgrass planted;
1956_______
£.
Se
19 £8_______
19£9
Acres of stand established from each year's seeding
19E6 seeding
19£8 seeding
1937 seeding
1939
seeding
__________
Method of sowing (furrow drill, disk drill, broadcast, etc.)
19£6_______
4.
19E7_______
1937_______
19£8_______
1959_______
If you got a stand, did it come up the first year or second?
19c6 seeding
1938 seeding
1937 seeding
1939
seeding____________
■90—
A P P E H m B.- E T A N D EETAflLISBED ON A SAMPLE OF CRESTED NHEATGRAEE SEEDINGE,
VALLEY, FALLON AND TOOLE CODHTILE
Soen with Dink. Drill*
19S5 to 19E8**County
and
year
Valley County
13 £5
1986
1957
1958
A U years
Average
Fallon Coiaity
1955
1936
1957
1958
All years
Average
Toole County
19c6
1937
1938
All years
Average
Valley, Fallon and
Toole counties
1935
1956
1957
1958
All years
_______AverLge__________
Acres
EOtm ,
SEJBDle
Number
of
fields
Etand
established,
acres
Stand
established^
ner nent
166.0
515.0
1473.5
970.0
3.0
21.0
36.0
18.0
128.0
157.5
1547.2
594.0
77.1
£0.6
91.1
40.6
5129.5
76.0
2026.7
64.8
59.8
5.0
179.0
251.0
54.0
1.0
6.0
6.0
2.0
5.0
37.5
80.0
54.0
100.0
£0.9
34.6
100.0
469.0
15.0
176.5
37.6
63.9
401.0
566.0
195.0
7.0
6.0
4.0
£46.0
324.0
105.0
86.5
57.2
55.8
1162.0
17.0
775.0
66.7
65.8
171.0
1095.0
2275.5
1219.0
4.0
54.0
48.0
24.0
133.0
541.0
1751.2
555.0
77.8
43.4
77.0
45.4
4760.5
110.0
2976.2
62.6
62.4
* Cfe the 4 fields which %ere reported £.e so$m with a furrow drill, a to tel
of 7„.5 acres, a stand was established on £6.7 acres, or 6£.£ per cent of
the area,
**Data collected December, 19:3.
APPLMDIX C.— CTABD EiTABLIERED ON A £ AMPLE' OF GREETED
VALLEY, FALLCBI AND TOOLE COUNTIES
HEATGRffB SEEDIN GE.
Sown Broadcast
1956 to 1958
Comty
end
year
Valley C o m t y
1956
1957
1958
All years
Average
Fallon C o m t y
1926
1957
1956
All years
Average
Acres
sown.
SJiaole
Number
of
fields
Stand
established.
acres
Etenti
established.
oer cent
45.0
177.0
260.0
2
9
9
0
126.0
118.0
0
71.2
45.4
482.0
20
244.0
50.6
58.9
56.0
90.0
50.0
5
I
I
10.0
0
0
17.9
0
0
176.0
5
10.0
5.7
17.9
55.0
I
101.0
502.0
290.0
695.0
Toole County
A U years
Average
Valley, Fallon and
Toole counties
1956
1957
1958
All years
Average
0
0
0
5
U
10
10.0
126.0
118.0
9.9
41.7
40.7
26
254.0
56.7
50.8
APPENDIX D.— STAND ETTAaLIfHEC ON A SAMPLE OF CRtSTFD VHEATGtiAES Si FDINGS,
VALLEY, FALLON AND TOOLE COUNTIES
Soen A U Methods
1955 to 1958
Counlgr
end
year
Valley County
1955
1956
1957
1958
A U year 6
Average
F a U o n County
1955
1956
1957
1958
A U years
Average
Toole Cotmty
1956
1957
1958
A U years
Average
Valley, Fallon and
Toole counties
1955
1956
1957
1958
A U years
Average
Acres
sown,
fU'iitnlo
Number
of
fields
Stand
estabUshed,
acres
Stand
established.
166.0
560.0
1695.0
1250.0
5
25
48
27
128.0
157.5
1485.7
512.0
77.1
28.1
87.8
41.6
5649.0
101
■ 2285.2
62.6
57.2
5.0
255.0
521.0
120.0
I
9
7
4
5.0
47.5
80.0
100.0
88.0
681.0
21
220.5
32.4
54.6
401.0
601.0
195.0
7
7
4
£46.0
524.0
105.0
86.3
55.9
53.8
1197.0
18
775.0
64.7
64.7
171.0
1196.0
2615.0
1545.0
4
59
62
55
153.0
551.0
1889.7
706.0
77.8
46.1
72.3
45.6
5527.0
140
5278.7
59.5
60.5
20.2
24.9
75.5
APPENDIX E.— RESULTS FROM PASTURING BIZF CATTLE ON TTfO TYPES OF PASTURE
AT MOCCASIN STATION, 1059*
(Each pasture contains 25.6 acres)
and
grass
Date
Started
Date
finished
Length
of
season,
days
Total
no. of
animal
days
Gains
in lbs.
per
acre
Animal
days
per
1954
Crested ^heatgraee
Netivo grass
4
4
4-20
6-20
8-29
6-1
152
42
586
168
44.4
10.9
24.8
7.1
1955
Crested wheatgrese
Native grass
4
4
4-25
5-25
9-24
7-51
155
70
612
£80
54.2
28.0
25.9
ZL9
1956
Greeted wheatgraee
Native grass
6
4
4-15
5-15
8-8
8-1
115
80
690
£20
61.0
54.7
29.2
15.6
1957
Crested wheatgrese
Native grass
6
4
45- 11
H *.
Year
Number
of
animals
20.5
£.4
1938
Crested whet tgraee
Native grass
6
4
1959
Crested wheatgrese
Native grass
Ave.
Crested wheatgrese
Native grass
7-9
:■
6-11
80
52
S g
21
41.1
6.1
4-21
5-11
10-18
10-18
180
160
1015
640
78.6
£6.6
45.0
27.1
8
4
4-26
5-6
8-24
10-11
120
158
960
652
86.7
50.5
40.7
26.8
5.67
4
4-21
5-19
8-28
8-16
150
90
724
561
61.0
£1.1
50.7
15.5
♦Source* Data token from a manuscript prepared for publication as a station bulletin by the De­
partment of Agronomy and the Judith Basin Branch Station of the Montana Agricultural Experiment
Station. Not to be published without permission of the Montana Agricultural Experiment" Station
.UUNI T
state
Montaae
COUNTY
Telley
T O W N S H IP
SUMMARY
SHEET
c lass
T Y P E S AN D C R A Z I N G G A & C I T Y
of
stock
FOHACC ache
■CQUIHCMENT UStO
RANGE LA N D
APPENDIX F.— RANGE SURVEY DATA FOR VALLEY COUNTY, 1937
TWH
RANGE TYPES
aa
. 36
. 36
■
«31« .
—
.
—
.
. «»48 131.
4198 . 194.
- =73». 188.
. 1161
M 7.
3? ; 441.
$41 , 606.
S ji
33 .1 6 1 8 8 .U ? a
3* . 4061. ZtSl
17
»683. 438
ISIS
86.
-» L =
«>. _qU __L
88.
I - -------- 1 5» .
ik(
— f S6 . 373». 4T9
. $7
-----------^ 5 8
. 39
I-
I
- 37
10,
»637 . 47»
I 630».
. 1311
2SH . 3 4 1 ,
------------- 3 3 . .
f --------- M
71,
,
3 3 1 4 . 814
6918— 423
W
.
1 - S
88
H
O
75
8
_______.
4
83 . 80
6 8 .1 8
,
,
I 348». » ? ! J O i I
.16043 813 .
38;
, 6446 17».
996,
.
- I
S M . 17,
i
.
6 *.
3,
J
. 6984 301
36
3107 197
811
.13006 678.
73,
5443 1 3 3 . 1864.
—
.1 0 7 *4 . 873. 841.
. 3398. 1 *4 .
3963 88
.
. 1783.
83
--------- .1 3 *1 1 , 592.
1236 28
—
-+ _ « 3 9 , 3 6 4 . _ « a a l 89
f - 4 » W » . 1 *2.
I.
. * 8T1,
7?!
-I-
. 8968.
132.
SA
30
311
2810 .
- - - - 1 *79 6.
-4------- .U 2 7 1 .
_
.14269.
. H 68.
I 10765.
*
I 9773.
,
* 9 1*8
4
!UZ27
I 2990.
e. 0 10877
-
36g .
. 37
.
SL
Q
1527. 101
- J 38 . 3079. 186
3685. Mi,
4- 39_
2ay .34E
8990.1361
4654 431
4898 313
141. 34
8647 689
5904. 665
8476. 8$4_ 5 9 » »4
89B -. 3 4 8 . »640.1388
2131 1 6 .
• =
1 15383.3874
TfiT 3 .
— . 36
5 956.1070
373187 .
------- - 37 , 7307.9.084
» 4 - 31.
---------- ; . a e - i .8689, 878 18501837 .
- 3« . 7698.1014
i« U S 3 —
. 40 . 3160. 498
S li
7 _
--------- 4 1 . . 8773. S S i - I
306 . 341 , 8657. 398 __ _ 4
, 35 .1 5 3 6 7 .8 3 0 9
4 i
J
0
0
1
0
SSiZr^Lm,,
13l 0
—
1
to ta l
I
0*
7,
SA
*
T
Z
242
225
786
1456
1176
768
112
19
937
1637
1138
812
710
543
183
703
TOTAL
T O W N S H IP
I
4455
10165
7657
7247
22956
22933
.
156
422 ,
242
MW.
IBi
I
1909
L
I
8
22%*.
3,
,
.
515
900.
268.
16355
I
.
225
,
726 4 . .
. 1456 .
1176
-------- 22820 .
768
__ 11465
118
3762 .
19
20787 .
937
_ „
20662 . 1637
91.
81574 . 1138
21183 .
812
6
21369 .
710
543
163
23040
703
23085
1069
. 23003 .
430
— 23036 .
338
- 23069 .
396.
25041
689
11502 .
191
. 23008 . 1461
23005 ,
636
0-1 -2 2 9 6 1
._ 2 2 9 0 1 .
354
38
1902 I
•
•
272
.
. 23021
i.
. - 23021 .
272
298,
J
3
22984
-*
-L -“ m
296
I
393 .
932
«.
22044
2- 440.
8 . 22984 .
393
to
201. 10
23023
2011 .
134
23157
2011
. 22993
1470....
•f
. 22993 . 1470
22970 .
711
52
*
22956 .
415
83061 .
649
23135 .
966
22833
2337
2 27 29 j
22811 . 1755
24432 j 1291 .
24490 . 1291
22604 . 1524 .
22604 . 1524
21398 . 1803 . 1292
22690 . 1803
8459 I
484
8048
16507
484
22298,
3199 .
743 _l_
23041 . 3199
22900 . 3726 .
136
23036 . 3726
22812 I 2851 . 952 .
23764.. 2851
23663.
2507 . 662 .
24325 . 2507
12078 .
929 . 3679 J
37
15994 .
929
I - 4 85 5-_30.
1 5 0 7 6 ] 1368 .
4675 .
114
12865 - 1368
30. 184*
38.
0870 , 1063 ] 2644 .
11514
1063
186.
6.
4237 ,
267 .
4237 .
287
53.
2.
3926 .
516.
3926 I
516
. 1688 . 36. 23577
3154 ] 630 +
24207 . 3154
0 . 2739 . 32. 16072 .
2140 , 2348 J
19506. 2140
M j 1866. 74.
12524. 1562 , 3 4 1 4 ,
15936 . 1562
12805 . 1692
223 78 ] 2023 |
672 I
23050. 2023
19613 , 2345 . 8072
2345
59
944-,
,
• 1%. I. 7751
"»41i P
_ I
7751 » 594
15 1714
44
6452
1114
5036
11526. 1114
* 7 5402. 144. 1 51 29 ’
1646 ] 3400 ]
18529.
12. 2216
.56,15610 2759
2861.
2759
44737
I 1112734
51161
;
I
1
- 56 I 2257.1700 27a to .
______a? - L 6563 1099___ a4 - u - i
. 3 8 . 8902.1091
486, 1»9.
-------—29 J 13060.1503 100« u » .
. 40
13278 1763
ai 36 -------1—AL - 4748 4 fli
114 - 3 0 .
31N » 34E . 1918. 234 106
* 35 . 5719.1097 26
49 .
3283.75|
882^
_ I
379.
JT
256.
22.
87,
I
165, 183,
159.
9.
281,
74.
773T L192, 1499.
326 2064.
. 1108. 48.
142.
, 5364. 1 1 4 .I l i i e f
,15190. 413. 1790.
I 9236. 369. 2911
.12277. 941,
.16234.1243 ,
30i
11
.16771. 883
665.
18,
.13422 . 772 , 3179 , 61,
.13770.1061.
35.
4
2927 , 82.
105:
12.
. 9684.1505,
103. 11,
. 6870. ? 93i 9 9 1 _ H
.14614.1649.
I
I
.14507.1330,
98.
.2868.
232. 103.
• 1547,
133. 185.
. 3266.
487.
94.
. 434.
2. 529.
. 1 17 2; H e .
16|
. 3661.
445 . 2243| I U j
. 3515.
345. 269.
,-2 7 4 1 , 293, 159,
. 2361.
159,
41,
. 2 49 5 |
196. 940]
. 1 7 1 9 .8 1 0 . 1606t
. 542.
16. 1900
.
1096, 121,25
. 3224] 176. 148
. 4061. 356.
166
I
|83000
,432268
:
ANCCLAND
IfAiUA6 HS-A
T AM
4455
10165
7667
7*47
_ i
».
Si
52
22956
I 1
6 20 .
22916
. — -f—
66
22983
0.
22820
ia
»
.
Be
f
11465
---- f 3762
-S ___ M i ____ 6 . 20787
« .
143
20664
L
21483
10.
era. 2=. 375
217.
21183
I T - -5 L
«.
21S.
Si 21299
55._
21264
0.
7451
0
23040
52
-I------ L 8459. 337. 5306. 189
6 0 « -6 H L
----- 3B . 2092,__
--------i
H
-------- 3 6 4 .
188.
a
- . 3 ? .
396. 1 5 .
- M . 1083.
U
-4 «19 . 1118
58
87% . 345. + 11411 1224
. 36 - . 16256 1189
I 36
5606. 2 5^
2
OfHtH
to tal
*AMi S*3AM
AM| S*«*MrISA3AM: SAl
1646
69483
T O W N S H IP
STATE
C O UNTY T a IIa j
SUMMARY
SHEET
T Y P E S A N D C R A Z I N G C A P A C IT Y
RANGE LAND
CLASS Of STOCK
FOKAGi A C M
KEOUIK EMENT USED
A P P M D I X F. (Continued)
RANGE.
SA
IA M : S A *A M • S A a_l—
A M.
*
* I9SOA-I
>
6 1
371
OAl
I n n m .’
1078
am'
AM?]
a
A
AM
TYPES
TOTAL
j
T o w n s n iK
AA
' ei . ■ " a * *
’
, jw. m
. .U aw ,
ItXMmiiTtq
371 .
3W .
311
1«
.
- X e
Sm
_
37I
*
<
3*81
30*0
2944
1728
47
82
2166
23046 . 2340
23178
20 6 9
23006
.
1923
HfifiL4-JM
20620
1671« . 187«
38* 16771. 147£
371. 17884.1888
3W . 81444.1783
.311
388 . 35E
I— I 381 , 19004.1864
. 371. 1*9811300
. 361 . 14171.1734
- 3« . 80531. 8633
™
- 3« . 18801. ’- 381 18333.
371. 13437."
-
-----------—
696156. 666^0
I . ___ _
7673 1760
622634, 36784 A 070
P a r o a n t t o t a l x a n g K _ . . 46. 96.
P e rc e n t n a tiv e *
"
B i . -to e i a a
.
.
.
229 4 6 i
196S3. J 174
186M . I t i l T
8* 8« . M 6T
13686. I B I S
18138. 2*69
1787« . * W
114» . 1764
£0448 8013
19370 8881
18498. 161«
17972 8314
16316.1480
.J S L J H U
T o t a l , t h i s 9M #
T o ta l b ro u g h t
f O TM Td
*
2« M
23012
23068
1W 66
332
1464
:3:sass.s;:4
,99
-t n *
P e rc e n t g r o je a re s
A v e ra g e P -A eZ i
Am ISM.
Description of ranpA types: I. Omeslsnd. £. Hondo.. 3. Pnmnnlsl Jnsis. 4. Sv ; e b r u a b .
10. Broad Lenr Trens. 13. Snltbruah. 14. Orsnanwood. la.
ArmusU Iwsods or trasses).
....
lr...^s.,.bl.d m d m -Othsr- lnolud. mtor surf.on nnd townslt. sereagn.
Taata ranee in timber,
The -la*- type is the abandoned land type (abandoned cropland)’.
e. Barren.
9. Plnon-Juniper.
.
2763
I
Irr
IiiS V
wate
3 1762 10005220
I
ITT7P. .I'I!»WMiilWlJllUi>iWli:Blt»
f !]] I
'OP."
nnovpr:son,L. S.
A. method of
vsl s of
r-n-e possibilities for sub-
13378
T375E;
C03.&
6 4 111