Factors contributing to the success or failure of Montana ranches
by John G Nye
A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate Committee in partial fulfillment of the requirment for the degree
of Master of science in animal husbandry with a minor in agricultural economics
Montana State University
© Copyright by John G Nye (1939)
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to determine so accurately as possible the extent to which the various
controllable, as well as uncontrollable, factors are responsible for the success or failure of Montana
ranches. An attempt has been made to analyze operating costs and income as they affect ranch
operations and management practices, and to indicate the practices which have proved most successful
This thesis was developed from secondary source material such as Agricultural experiment Station
bulletins and additional data which are to be found in the files of the Department of agricultural
Sconomics at Montana state college.
A careful study of the material at hand would seem to indicate that the most important factors which
influence the success of Montana ranches are: 1. A definite long-time plan of operations for each
Individtml unit bused upon the adaptability of the plant, and the type of production, as they are related
to the physical environment.
2. Management and the ability of the operator to obtain: high calf and lamb crops, high yields per acre
of farm crops for supplementary feed, high quality In his produce, and advantageous prices for his
commodities.
3. Keeping a complete and accurate set of records, and planning a definite budget of expenses and
Income.
4. Death loss in livestock must be held to a minimum.
5. The general price level of agricultural commodities, more particularly as compared with that of other
commodities, is of importance. The writer has placed this factor last in the group of factors determining
the financial outcome of Montana ranch operations, largely because it is less subject to the control of
the operator.
It appears to the writer that the factors contributing to the suc-cess or failure of ranch operations rank in
importance in the order named. It is essential that the operator give some attention to all of these factors
if his ranching operations are to be successful. FaCTOES CCgiTI g m C T S t o TFfE S00CS8S O- SAItoRB OF
SCHTm BAtoRRS
by
Jcdm I . ' 3%
A Tm^IS
ubnlttod to the Orado ite Gmsltteo
In
partial fulfillment of the ro-ulrocients
for the Degree of
L etor of
cicRoe I r Mml Ileyb ndry
Mth a Mnor In .grlmiltur l Eoonmles
at
Sont ms S ta te Coll o e
mrovod:
I m :n , Omduate C aanittoe
HCflNeee, Moct na
Jtm oe 1930
/ / * 7 ?
r_
TA3LH
of
o o rro rrs
L to t o f Tatilee caul IU u o tra t Ions
3
bs f r a c t
f o r t I*
I’a r t II*
4
In tro d u ctio n aud
I o to r le H
'ovtow
4» E arly ’ !sto ry of th e :ev e lopnont o f the
Eaase Industry in Kontara
6
Hnyslcal and Technical Footers C o n trlb u tl:^
to Success
10
A* Itiysloal C h a ra c te ris tic s o f ISoetam
B* l^ r e s o f roduction
C* Breeding Praotloea
10
H
14
P e rt IHw uoncaslc Factors O o n trlb u ti’if, to Success
.vw
3*
Ce
De
I tir t 17«
5
17
Land U tiliz a tio n and ’fteologloal y .o ta rs
Land Charge
Land olicy- and th e Fsws Irogran
The f ood f o r Bound and H oiuato C redit
Itio iliL le a
Be Faapo C a ttle !Production P r otlooa
F* Pange Cheep Production P ra c tic e s
17
IS
21
B trm ry md Conclusions
57
oknorHedgnento
22
25
44
63
H evlw of L ite ra tu re
64
62728
Jm i i m y r r ,T im s
F ig , I , Chowing th e th re e Major ©glens o f Range Teef
C a ttle Produetioe in Rontam
•Li, 2 , abating th e t m Major l ogions o f Range Sheep I r o duction in Fontana
P29
29
33
ft
SB 38
34
S
fa b le I , Goet I t e r s per ni.Br*I D nlt to r Jo n tin a Prmehea,
1929 and IS 3
Table I I , Operating Costa per ,'m lm l U nit by ; ©’, ions,
1929 to 1933
fa b le H I , Costs and ’©ifrhts f o r D ifferen t ges o f {kittle
I CiTketed , 1929-1933
Table 17 , iv e -y e o r Average StiJUUsg P rice p e r Ptm drodrelrht
a t Punch to Cover Costa Fine In te r e s t a t 6 P er Cent
Table V, Ihe .verifies and V ariatio n s In th e Ik rb er o f
C a ttle U nits Pun per Man f e a r o f Labor T im During
th e Flvo-yo&r Period
T ible T I, flange and Hay Land Deed and Lmood, 1929-1933
Table V II, Graslnn Costs on In d iv id u a l P mclies
Table V III, Use o f i n t e r Feeds and ^ nge Sqpplen m te
Table IX , Ray Costs on In d iv id u al 'inches ( vere.ee 19291933)
Table X, Tho ,vers tie R olatlonahip o f the Various P er !lead
Coot I t t n s o f A ll Ranotoos Jtudied in the Tee Areas
a t tho D eglnniri and Close o f th e Ctody
T ib le H , ver-Age O perating Costs per Em d by R egions,
1928-1933
Table H I , .verage Investzmnt Costs por !load
Ttible X III, .vempo Ranch Crganizaticm
Table XIV, Sisso o f Ranches by Regions in 1928
Table XV, verage o f " a c to rs f fo o tin g Inm xe fo r th e 19281932 Period
Table XVI, vemgo o f Factors in O peration Costs fo r tho
Tao R ed o n e, 1928-1932
Table XVH, P rise s Phld to Fam ora fear Larb and Vool and
Index o f Lmsb and oo l IiTioea Ccssbinod in I c n ta m ,
19X0-1936
S ggS
?
52
53
SG
13
15
ABfMB dT
Hie purpose o f th is study i s to determine aa a c c u ra te ly a s possible
tf c ex ten t to vihich th e v ario u s c o n tro lla b le , s r o l l a s uneontrr l la b l o ,
f eto ro a re re sp o n sib le f o r th e success o r f a ilu r e o f Ie s ta n a r ncheOe An
attem pt has been r de to analyze operating c o s ts and lnocs^e a s tiiey a ff e c t
ranch o p eratio n s and management p ra c tic e s , and to in d ic a te th e p r -ctlces
w 'ich have roved most su cce ssfu l.
H ils th e s is s»is developed from secondary source m ate ria l such as
A fT ioultural Experiment S ta tio n b u lle tin s and a d d itio n a l fe ta which ore to
be found In the f i l e s o f th e Department o f ^ g rlc u ltu ra l Zeonoctica a t Monbtna
t a l e S o lieg e.
v c a re fu l study o f the m a te ria l a t hand would e e m to In d ica te th a t
th e most in-xirtant fa c to rs which influence the success o f lo n ten e ranches
a re I
I.
A d e fin ite long-tim e plan o f operatio n s fo r each In d iv id ael
u n it bused upon th e a d a p ta b ility o f th e p la n t, and th e type
o f production, a s they ire r e la te d to th e ph y sical environ­
ment.
Bm Management and th e a b i l i t y o f the o perator to o b tain : high
c a l f and Isrb c ro p s, high y ie ld s p er tore of farm crops fo r
supplementary fee d , high q u a lity in h is produce, and advan­
tageous ric e s to r h is COr-=Odit i e s .
3.
looping a complete and :courate so t of re c o rd s, and planning
a o fIn ito budget of expenses nd lneore.
4.
Death lo s s in liv e sto c k must be held to a m ln ism .
5.
th e general p rice le v e l o f a g ric u ltu ra l oori o d i ti o s , more
p a rtI c u l T ly a s compared with th a t o f o th er commodities, i s
o f lm o rtn n c e . Tiie w rite r luis placed th is f c to r l a s t In
th e group o f fa c to rs determ ining th e fin a n c ia l outcome o f
Io n ta j1.! ranch o p e ra tio n s, la rg e ly bee -.use i t i s le s s subject
to th e c o n tro l o f th e o p e ra to r.
I t appears to th e w rite r th a t th e fa c to rs c o n trib u tin g to th e suc­
cess o r f a ilu r e of ranch operations rank in importance In the order named.
I t la e s s e n tia l th a t th - o perator give some a tte n tio n to a l l o f these
fa c to rs i f h is ranching op eratio n s arc to be su c ce ssfu l.
-5 -
F vrxziD Ge T ttw n tx* % rS i .juccm ; r r r r
cp
F /jc m a
r%:.rt I
CfmoDConcH \tir- m nroni& u.
This th o s iJ i s p rim a rily concornod iS itIi determ ining tiie f iOtcre
1ch tiro moat effootiTO in lnfluonoing the oueoeoo, o r f a llu r o » of Montana
r rohoa,
la pl icod v. on an a n a ly sis o f nhysloal and oooncttic
fo rce s Miioh be r u-on typo m6 e x to rt o f onor tio c s
The datsi r e so rted I
to
been isaenblod from secondary scare##*
a re m ostly xiblidhod m a te ria l o f the Deptrtner t o f
't Montams s t a t e (killego,
m e t Iced.
Timoe
Tlou l t u m l Peanonico
3tapplenent I inform ation m a dbt lined tro n j x h l i -
c t i e r s o f the United S ta te s DopnrtRent of , T ici ltu r c and th e
rodnetioc
S re d lt jtidoeiatioau
There a re f i r e d is tin c t periods in the deseloinent o f a g ric u ltu re
w ith in th e S t :te$
F irs t* tho 'orloti of
tmbeo
s e t t l e c o ra tio n s fron th e Rid­
d le c f th e Ia o t century to 1910; sooond, tho hoRcstead c m ,
!‘o -m r and m r -
tl. e e rlo d from 1910 to 1920 (3 0 ), narked by r eld expansion o f dry lend
fanning which
bos
influenced by favorable m oisture conditions and high p ric e s ;
t h i r d , the readjustm ent
tin e
e rlo d
f t o r tl.e t»tr Cxom 19U0 to 1925, during which
r ic e s and m oisture co n d itio n s dropped to a mere n c m a l l o r o l , reducing
the number o f f rra and re s u ltin g in rea d ju stn o n t Cd* farm v Iuoo; fou -th,
the
c rie d fre e 1925 to 1932, ch aracterized by in cro sod tec! nclo g ic a l Im-
:iravtnont s and neefcontoed dry-L nd farming Wtloh re s u lte d In Increased c u l­
tiv a te d
arc
o r f j-n (30); f i f t h , th e
erlod from 1932 to the
ro so n t
tim e during which an a ttw .p t Ie being made to plan a g r io u ltu r il operations
and production on a lo n g -tire b a s is , emphasizing b eat us© o f th e land and
eonconratlon o f rceouroea,
o.i-Iv Iilsto r y o f th e Dovoloiiront o f th o Range
' Ieila a try in IaonteuBa*"*
The development of Z’ontana a s a r inge t e r r i to r y bog m bout the
middle o f th e I a t c en tu ry , or about th e Seee tim e
s h er mining =OtIvitIoa.
In f iO t, th e f i r s t in p o rtu rt o u tle t fo r -.ontuna’ a b eef m s to th e m iners.
I t w.ta n o t, lio w re r, u n t i l about 1870 th a t th e industry begun to aeaww
la rg e pro p o rtio n s.
t th.-it tim e (1870), the T e rrito ry o f iiceteum bid 35,400
he id of o i t t l e o f which a -rcflcim. tfsly o n e -th ird m e c la s s if ie d a s d a iry
c a t t l e irvl th e
t) nr tw o -th ird s as beef c a t t l e (7 ).
In tho e r ly years o f th e in d u stry , long-homed s te e rs f r m Texas
were t r -lled north to Montana, fo tto r» d on th e range nrd the® r >ved e =st to
th e n a rk e t•
a t te
L ite r , breeding stock from th e southwest w s brought in ti the
nd by 1885 the t o t a l o t t l e numbers had re tched 638,000 (7 ), In d ic a t­
ing th e ra p id ity o f growth o f ; ont m *e b oef c t t l e in d u stry .
Durin= th e la t e se v e n tie s , c a t t l e ranching bee
a: d huge c a t t l e ecrp n ie s were formed.
Suropwm Cnp i t fil and th e r c m n tic ,
<0
eatceodingly popular
Those wore finaz«ed by K .stw n and
dve; turoun l i f e o f th e nO ovhof bee tie
a otron -or lu re than hid boon th a t o f tiie gold diggers in IfM=S.
co rding
to Ilultn (9 a ), Oattlo w r e pure? tsod sig h t unsoen n d on th e "book-count" o f
th e s e l l e r , which assumed no death lo s s and 100 per cent c a lf crop from th e
cows tvu-.iod on th e r rigC.
Favorable im lstu re conditions Ritde e x c e lle n t pasture and th e ex­
ceed in* Iy Eiild w inttirs experienced a t th a t time enabled the stockmen to
run t h e i r stock on th e range th e year round without th e use o f supplementil
food.
The very f a c to r s which rude Montana an Important rang# c a ttle
duolii' s t a t e caused d r a s tic loasea in 1806.
ro -
The unusually favorable condi­
tio n s under which th e Tinge c a t tl e in d u stry had developed in th e s t a te led
to undue optimism on th e p a rt o f the cattlem en.
Iy 1886, th e herds had in ­
creased in rimy places to th e point where grazing m s b a re ly s u ffic ie n t fo r
summer needs and the C a ttle went in to th e w inter w ith on inadequate supply
o f feed .
The aevoro w inter o f 1886-1887 caused t e r r i f i c lo s s e s ; hundreds o f
cattlem en were bankrupt when th e w inter was over, md th e in d u stry was b dly
crip p led f o r nearly twenty years (27).
The d ra s tic lesson o f the w inter o f 1886-1887 did much to bring
about changes in the slipshod methods o f c a t t l e ranching.
The need fo r an
a d e m ate su ply o f w inter fe e d , and inoreisod co n tro l o f range, both of
which could b e st be effe cte d on more m oderate-sized, w e ll-reg u lated ranches,
became reco nlzed.
here followed a fprndual break-up o f th e b ig o u tf its in
favor o f sm aller concerns, w ith an increased tendency among ranchers toward
c o n tro llin g more o f t h e i r range through land ownership and lease ra th e r than
to continue almost 100 per cent o p eratio n on Public Domain such as had been
p racticed previously.
The Government began an ed ucational program,
f t e r th e disastro u s
lo sse s su ffered during t h i s aeriod, t o discourage over-grazing on th e Public
SQteia Jancle Ranobers easr th e aw w iitlty o f (growing more f e e l and ht& to
tid e th ee over th e severe w inter m ath s*
T'-.e iG creaslnr demand fo r e a rIy-R aturIn , z ep id ly -g ra siae o t t l e
w ith ro re pronounced boef q u a litie s led to th e use o f h u llo
brooding; on th e lone-horned cows.
Cf
Im roved
The f i r s t boef b u lls to b e used by ?'on-
tana ranehere were n o stly S horthorns.
These were g radually r e p l aed by
Ikirofords u n t i l a t the -rte s n t tim e the I eroford i s popular almost to tho
t o t I ex clu sio n o f Shorthorns fa r use in r-n co hoof production In Montana*
Tlte n c t l c o c ind icated above sl owed d ir e c t r e s u lts w ithin a ooa•B isitlv ely few yours.
The t y s o f thjo C o ttle m s nuch Improved, w inter
I osjiOS were m t or l o l l y reduced, th e ranges ware In the
r e c e s s o f improving
iw th er than d e tc rlo m ittn -:, and tho area m e a c tu a lly c rry ln g m re c a t tl e
t- a i t had been able to do previously*
Saurdcrsen(22} re o rte d th a t th e re were something le s s than
500,000 sheep (shown In a n ln a l u n its ) in 1090.
Theoe l n e r s sod to an a l l
high in 1901 when s e t bare wore matured fa r wool production.
Bblloaing a
sharp d e clin e in the yours 19C1-19C2, tax-boro o f Sheep rom in ed q u ite uni­
form u n t i l 1910, retu rn in g in 1912 to tho point rc xdhed t m y e ars rrevlcua*
Gthor high p o in ts m ire reuebed i s 1930, regaining a t a le v e l through 1931
and 1934, .f to r rhlch a steady d e clin e took p l.e e w Ich continued through
1936.
* .r, ar.ir--5l S tiit' i s "arsaiC^ped" as" <Tm lU cg one cow, one h o rse , '4^'head o f
sheep, o r 3 head o f fcoga. The range cow t e l l i n g about 1000 pounds i s takon
as th e u n i t , yo rlin g e m u n i tn o -th ird s o f a u n i t , tm -y c a r-o ld s .05 o f a
u n i t , th re o —year—
old s t ojk-, one u n i t, bul l s , 1*3 u n its . Thesa r , rosont
the approximate re la tio n s h ip s o f d iff e r e n t c la sse s o f c a t t l e in t h e ir range
:.d food r c u ire u a n ts .
•f t o r tho d e o il no In llv e cto c k in the l a t e e i^ h tlo e and e arly nine­
t i e s , a steady ln aren a© In t o ta l anirsnl u n its o f M vestook took olaoe In
t it ,
It
h p o in ts In 1901, 1919 and 1934 aooordln# to cVam d w o n
■10“
I s r t IX
HIYBIC g,
T--QgUOAI, F,OTDRS CL:TRJWTIKO
Tj
[ ' .33
ItjyBleal C h arao tarlg tlea o f Uoiitaoa
Pbyslcttl fa c to rs a re o f p rira ry Unportaaoe In determ ining the type
and ex ten t o f
red u ctio n o f th e farming or ranching u n it.
Topcir tphy, ele v n -
t io n , s o i l , amount (a s w ell a s d is tr ib u tio n and kind) o f p re c ip ita tio n , dur­
a tio n o f snow cover, a r lia b le mi to r supply,
nd wind v e lo c ity vary widely
even fo r more o r le s s lo c a liz e d a reas o f th e a t t o .
I t i s necessary th a t
th ese fa c to rs be appraised Jtd c a re fu lly an JLysed before xn attem pt i s made
to organize an o p eratin g u n i t.
hen these
h y s lc il fa c to rs a re understood,
th e c © rotor must organize h is p la n t and plan M s o p eratio n s Ir, h rtsony with
them i f ho hi oa to be ouocossful.
T‘ie physical fa c to rs mentioned above a rc la rg e ly responsible fo r th e
ocf Io I c a l asp ect o f th e n a tiv e forage on our r n g e lan d s.
According to
Inok (2) ^ e a tifjTass and g ra m dominate th e native v eg etatio n In th e range.
Ituff.,Ic g ra ss has lim ited d is trib u tio n in Montana b u t, where p re se n t, m y
be used in c o n tro llin g ru n -o ff and ero sio n on w oll-d rlin ed sloping IaM (2 4 ).
’tu ff ilo g rass ranks h i # fo r ,grazing purposes and, although i t i s a ra th e r
lew
red u cer, i t i s highly regarded a s a n u tritio u s and exceedingly p a la ta b le
8Vire g race ( 2 ) , e x c e lle n t fo r cummer and cured w inter pasturago.
OBrma
i s often nistakiwi fo r b u ffa lo g rass (24) and resembles i t scaaenshnt In growth
c> a r a c te r io tio s .
Other g rasses which a re of g re a te r o r le a s e r importance
in v ario u s more o r le s s lo c a liz e d a re a s o f the s ta te a re p la in s bluegrass
(Pot a r id a ) , Cheatgrass (Brorma tecterum ) and the needle g racccs, e sp e c ia lly
-IL
needle and thread (S tip e comata) (35).
There are a ls o numerous flowering
p la n ts , annual weeds, and shrubs which have increased considerably on mis­
managed md drought stric k e n a reas (1 5 ).
IHsmanugenent, augmented by drought,
has been an Important fa c to r in decreased carrying cap acity o f range lands
In Montana (6 )(3 6 ).
ooordln: to Johnson and Saunderson (1 1 ), th e major uses o f land r e ­
sources in 1934 were; 1U b llc Domain, 5,878,931 a c re s , r a tio n a l F b re sts, 18,890,266
a c re s , Indian R eservations, 5,847,318 .ores. S ta te Linds, 5,256,3.4 a c re s .
County la n d s, 2,526,349 a c re s , and land in f a r e s , 44,659,352 acres (crop Lind,
p astu re lan d , woodland, and o th er IaM in farm s).
Considerable use i s made o f
T atlo n al F o rests and Indian R oservitiona f o r grazing purposes, e sp e c ia lly dur­
ing the sunner months.
In a d d itio n , considerable farming is done in seme
a re a s on th e Indian R eservations.
Types of Production
Livestock production Io o f outstanding importance a s regards gross
a g r ic u ltu r a l income o f the s ta te ( th is v a rie d from SC ;>er cent in 1928 to
76 per cen t in 1931, and m a almost equally divided between c a t tl e and sheep
e n te rp ris e s o f th e s ta te during t h is period) (1 1 ).
Dairy c a t t l e , swine -and
p o u ltry a re of minor importance in the s ta te and are not lik e ly to increase
m a te ria lly in t h i s re sp ec t in th e fu tu re due to the f a c t th a t t h i s type of
production i s su ite d to th e irrig a te d a re a s and sm aller farm u n its .
The
d istan ce from la rg e cen ters o f consumption and r e la tiv e ly s n a il lo c a l demand
a re fa c to rs which a re not conducive to any decided Increase In th e importance
o f t h i s t y e of
red u ctio n , a t l o i s t under present co n d itio n s.
These liv e ­
stock e n te rp ris e s have developed to supply th e s t a te needs and n o t, g e n erally
speakln,;, f o r ex p o rt.
-1 2 -
The major p o rtio n of Montana*a beof O a ttle cmd aheap a re raised
uz dar r nn@ conditions ind a re found on ranciw i wfK?re t h o lr production I s ,
in most Casea, th e only production e n te rp ris e of th e o p e ra to r.
There are
some combination crop and liv e sto ck ranches in c e rta in a re a s , in Khittfi cases
o t t t l e see= to be more s a tis fa c to ry than sheep (11).
The continued te n e t o f the ph y sical environment, w ith n ls tu r e th e
c h ie f lim itin g f a c to r , i s gradually compelling readjustm ent to proper
land u se .
I r r ig a tio n t unaln#r should overtuaU y rove oomplm-entary to th e
dry farming and range liv e sto c k in d u s trie s .
This would in su re fpreator s ta ­
b i l i t y In xroduotlon of liv e sto c k and crops and make th e s t a t e 's yprlc u ltu r a l
7*0
rsim more =^ermiient (2 0 ).
For a n a ly sis o f range c a t t l e nroduoinr; u n its , th e s t a t e bus been
<1video In to f r e e major regions (See Fig. I ) .
The grouping i s based upon
d ifferen c e s In th e topography, c lim a te , m tiv e v eg etatio n and o th er p h y sio il
f a c to r s , and th e e ffe c t o f th ese upon ranch management and o rg an izatio n .
TPe VJestom r e Ion has an e le v a tio n ranging botm en 3,000 and 7,000
fe e t with th e c a t t l e ranches Ioc ted p rin c ip a lly in th e high mountain v a l­
le y s .
In t h i s a re a , hay must u su ally be fed continuously fo r from th re e to
fiv e months,
approximately 45 per cent o f th e su rface area i s in B x tlo m l
Forests (2 3 ).
The f o o t h il l region la one of low mountain ra n g e s, f o o t h il l s , and
le v e l o r r o llin g bcnohlanda and b a s in s .
range land in th e s t a t e .
tio n s o f t h i s re g io n .
Dry fanain
I t Is th e h i h eat grade fans and
I s su ccessfu lly c a rrie d on in some sec­
C a ttle r niches a re g e n erally lo cated around and in
th e rou.-h land and secondary mountain a reas (23),
M o u n ta in
F o o th ill
P lains
^MlSSOULArowiu
ft O3 t SuO
rowoe* si*ts
Fig. I - Showing the Three Major Regions of Range Beef C attle
Production in Montana (23)
•14-
H e p la in s reg io n i s nore lev o l o r r o llin g Innd; i t i s g en erally
d r i e r th an th e regions to th e w est.
There has been, in th e p a s t, consider­
able cash g ra ta and g e n eral farming in t h i s a re a .
im portant, p a rtic u l r ly in th e rougher lands*
Range liv e sto c k kns been
ITiore i s g e n e ra lly le a s
w inter feeding duo to a sh o rte r period o f snots cover*
ccording t o Saunderson and Vlnke (2 0 ), free, the standpoint o f range
sheep production In Montana, th e s t a te i s divided in to two f a i r l y v e il de­
fin ed areas due t o d iffe re n c e s in o peration p ra c tic e s and type of production
( ee 'Sg, 2 ) ,
( a) E astern ' ontana, o r th e Cr a t I a l f a re g io n , because o f
c e rta in c l i r .i t i c d iffe re n c e s and range types o f fo rag e, places enphasis upon
wool : roduetlon in most case s, with feeder lambs a s a au^plem ntary o n te rris o ,
(3)
os te rn f'ontana, or the lrrtem ount in re g io n , with i t s more bun-
dant « t o r supply, higher and c o o ler summer ran g es, and considerable use of
ISatlom l F o rests or mountain and f o o t h il l ra n g e s,
a v a ila b le t Juroughout c o st o f th e summer season.
roduoea lu sh reen forage
These c o n d itio n s, in Addi­
tio n to fu rn ish in g an abundance o f succulent feed fo r l a r b s , increase th e
m ilk flow o f the ewes which i s o f considerable in e r t " nce in
roduoing m ilk-
f a t lambs o ff th e rarv’e a t weening tin e .
breeding I r a c tie e s
The fine-w ool ewe o f R «gbouillet o r herlno breeding i s th e foundation
(4)(10) o f th e range sheep in Montana.
In the p a s t, th e use o f Rambouillet
rams predominated in th e e a ste rn area due to the fa c t th a t wool production i s
emphasised in t h i s a re a .
Feeder W b s a re a supplementary e n te rp ris e in the
p la in s area g en erally since conditions a re not conducive to f a t 1-imb produo-
In te m o u n ta in
Fig.
P la in s
- Showing the Two Major Regions of Range Sheep Production
in Montana (20)
—
16—
tlo n .
tThcre has re c e n tly been an inore-islng tendency to m rd the use o f
th e C o rrle d ile and Columbia ram In croeslnn; on th e fine-w ool ewes o f the
pin I e area In an e f f o r t to g e t away from vx>ol-blln d n e ss, Increase length
o f stn p le and a Iae of ewe, and to in crease th e per cent o f la rk crop.
In the intenaouHtaIn area th e p ra c tic e o f breeding th e fine-w ool
n t i r e o' -as to b la c k -f eed r
3 of mutton breeds has be«i g enerally
coe to d .
In t h i s a re a the su c cu le n t, more abundant v eg etatio n and more advantageous
summer grazing conditions g e n erally a re conducive to increased weight in the
la r h a , so th a t a f a i r l y high percentage go to th e markets a s m ilk -fa t larh a
o f f th e ewes a t weaning tim e.
In th e e a rly years o f beef c a t t l e Improvement in th e s t a te th ere m s
considerable use o f Shorthorn b u lls on the range cows o f nondescript breed­
in g .
erefo rd b u lls L ite r replaced the sh o rth o rn s.
Hereford calves were
ana H e r framed a t b ir th th an Shorthorns find le a s d i f f ic u lt y m s encountered
a t calving, tim e.
age
This was e s p e c ia lly im portant when th ere m o a feed sh o rt­
rid th e cows were allowed to become th in and weak before c Ivlng.
Xlso,
Horeltord c a t t l e were apparently b e tto r s u ite d to range c o n d itio n s, were
b e tte r r u s t l e r s , and due to a heavier h id e and cent of h a i r , ware able to
w ithstand the extrem ely cold and stormy w inters more e a s ily than th e Short­
horns.
vt th e rxreaant tim e , Hereford b u lls a re used almost to th e t o t a l
exclusion o f o th er hoof breeds fo r range b eef Toduotion in Mcmt ana.
-1 7
i irt I I I
aOOHDI
Ltina ^ tlll- V tlo n nnd I^ o lo n lo al Factors
L iIia u t il i z a ti o n and tlso decree w ith efeleh i t eonfbree to wHost"
land uac ppnetieeo i s o f poranount ln p o rt noe in d e te m ln in c W e th e r the
o e ra t ion o f th e p lan t w ill be su cce ssfu l or otherw ise.
In th e e a r l i e r land policy o f our O ovcrnnert, i t was considered de­
s ira b le to c a t our public lands In to p riv a te ownership.
"beat" land use were ur-lrv; t h i s
Cthor forces than
roeedure, i t i s tr u e , b u t n ev erth eless
t h i s p o licy ViS g e n e ra lly a c c e p t s to be ooi duolvo both to the boot use o f
th e land nd to a p e n a ment a g ric u ltu re .
Time bes proven t h a t t h i s system
o f T rlw te owieMltlp in m ny eases was not only undeoir bio Vrcm the stand­
point o f th e in d iv id u a l, but
Some fa c to rs which h«v
Iso encouraged d e stru c tiv e use o f the lan d .
onccxmigeS I ad ota c rs in doatrtsstivo land
use a re :
I.
m i l l incomes allowed no funds with which to p ra c tic e the
various fort s o f conservation.
2»
Loer lnocnoa oore often duo to th e f o t
the lands tiiieh
they occupied were su b -cn rcin al fo r crop production, o r fo r
t':@ ty c of production
ra c tio e d .
3.
U nite were too srvail In s iz e to
rovide an adequate irco n e.
4.
Speculative to n d em les of the o p erato rs prevented then frcm
follow!: ; a sound, lonc-tlm o pvo^nau
5.
uoh oconomio f s t o r e a s
r
;1l'.1 juativont in f a i r e r buying Powwf
08'
ovtwr-c p lt l l a tlo n of p la n t, >«d lndebtednesa have a v y a Vited misuse of reso u rces,
6 . .d io r t-te r a lo -eea cm g ra zin g la n d s, co m p etitiv e bidding fear
I e iSed la n d , and firoe use o f Public Domain made i t tepoaelblo
fo r th e o j^ ra to r to use th ese land s c o n stru c tiv e ly ,
E ffo rts a re bo i n i node by the Bureau of A nim l In d u stry , fann C red it
A dm inistration, Bureau o f ^ irlo u ltu ra l Economics (1 2 ), D ivision o f land
U tiliz a tio n (1 2 ), and th e h a tlo c a l Forest Service to make adjustm ents Which
w ill make p o ssib le th e o per*ttlo n o f a c o n stru c tiv e , long-tim e Oiirlc u ltu r a l
p o lic y .
Land Oharas
L nd charge i s undoubtedly o o o f th e most Important sin g le fa c to rs
In determ ining ranch Inoor-e.
R eadjeatoent In land oh rg e a , based on a c tu a l
f o rth a s determined by loty^-tlme p ro d u ctiv ity under p ro |« r uao i s fundamental
In correcting; th e system o f misuse of lan d ,
,coordlng to T o o tell (3 4 ), ^no
sin g le fa c to r has bid more influence in re ta rd in g p riv a te ownership of
range Isnd than high r e a l e s ta te p rice s
nd tax es".
Ihe dry land farming era from 1910 to 1920 took place under unusu U y fav o r,ibla m oisture co n d itio n s,
I h l a , coupled w ith in fla tio n a ry ,
war­
time p ric e s , gave a high n e t re tu rn to land which under anything lik e longt i r o average years o f m oisture conditions and r i c e , would not have been
economical to c u ltiv a te .
This h i h net re tu rn
vms
c a p ita liz e d (22) In th e
form of high land values which wore resp o n sib le fo r mtxt'nlfylng th e p rice on
a d j.o e n t range lands which were l e f t unbroken.
The proof th a t land valu es were h ig h , out o f a l l reason with a b i l i t y
-1 9 -
to -JTOdtiOG, l i e s In th e fa c t t h a t ,
1.
Fans mortgage debts Have been rep eated ly sealed down during the
l a s t 20 y e a rs.
2.
ocordirg to Fenne (1 8 ), "during th e years 1898 to 1937, since th e
F a tio n a l Bankruptey act o f 1896 he# been in o p era tio n , alm ost 5,900 Hontam
farei bankruptcy eases have beer, concluded in th e fe d e ra l d i s t r i c t co u rt8%
The o tses recorded annually averaged lo ss than te n peer year
SC to 75 cases
r l o r to 1912 and
or year during th e e a r y e a rs , b u t beginning in 1921, th e num­
b er leaped upm rd to a
a k o f 593 cases recorded in 1924 (38).
SlnM 1924,
th o ro ' as been a dotsnmrd tren d u n t i l a t th e present tin e th e re la an average
o f le s s th an 50 oases annually.
The tremendous increase in tiie proportion
o f bankruptcies o f farm ers during th e 1920-1950 p e rio d , over those of labor­
e r s , m iners, s k ille d workers, merchants and o th e rs(1 8 ), i s in d ic a tiv e o f th e
o f maladjustment In land v a lu e s.
I t must be remembered th a t a g r i ­
c u ltu r a l lands ware o v e r-c a p ita liz e d during th e war-time p erio d .
h is force
m s not f e l t in th e o th e r groups.
3.
Faia r e a l e s ta te mortgage fo reclo su res reached an a l l - t i r e high
during the period 1920-1930.
These, Ib r t h i s ten-year p e rio d , amounted to
f o u r - f if th s o f th e t o t a l f o r th e s t a t e from th e time of th e f i r s t fo reclo su re
in 1870 up to January I , 1938.
This i s a r e f le c tio n o f o v e r-c a p ita liz a tio n
arid indebtedness on farming lands Miich took place >rior to 1920 (19).
4.
The lu cre Be in ta x delinquencies on d ry -l nd farms t; ieh took
place during the 1925-1934 period (16) i s in d ic a tiv e of the m la d ju s tro n t
in rwoporty tax e s on t oao lands*
SuoH am eoctensivo record of sealed—down d e b ts, bankruptc I e s , tax de—
lln ru e n c ie s , and mortgage foreclosures i s c e rta in ly incrim in atin g evidence
-2 0
o f Improper use o f re so u rc e s, u n ju s tifia b ly high I nd v lu e s , and o f tmrea so m b ly high ta x e s .
I t la tru e th a t th e y ears frraa 1929 to 1935, p a r t i ­
c u la r ly , covered a c r i t i c a l economic p e rio d , not only fo r a g ric u ltu re in
o n taca. but to r th e e n tir e economic ore m ira tio n of th e TM tod S ta te s ,
e re rth o lo s s , th e high nropcrtionato Increase in the fa c to rs in d icated above
f o r Montana farm ers and ranchers over those o f people in o th er occupations
in the s t a t e fo r th e period sh o w , is proof th a t an im portant fo rc e , not to
be found in th e o th e r f i e l d s . I s to be met by th e terming group,
The v Iue o f any proper t y i s d ir e c tly re la te d to th e amount of net
lnocne i t vd.ll produce over a long period o f t i n e .
This period should not
be o: a r t o r th e p ic tu re i s lik e ly to be d is to rte d .
I t should bo long enough
to alleys? fo r a lev e lin g o ff in such fo rce s a s price and a b i l i t y to produce
r -th er th-m to base th ese land v alu es on p ric e s alone which might prove to
be a t a p o in t, tem porarily high in th e cycle of a lte rn a tin g high and low
p ric e s (2 9 ).
Bir incomes rrere n-de in th e e a rly f r e e range days c f th e range 'r e ­
duction in d u stry .
Hoay r-mchors wore a b le to s t a r t op eratio n s w ith a f m
hundred d o lla rs invested in liv e sto ck and equipment.
40 y e a rs, sin c e th e advent o f th e need fa r (a)
Kovmvor, in the Iuot
to r c o n tro l o f th e range
through ownership and le a s e , (b) supplemental feed production, (o) money to
pay high ta x e s , and high f re ig h t r a t e s , the incom e of th e se ranchers have
s te a d ily declined*
hen proper co n sid eratio n Is given to th e high c o st o f
o p e ra tio n , i t i s obvious th a t only a narrow margin o f n et re tu rn remains
w ith which to pay land charges.
tin e
Kangc land values should
* based upon Iong-
veroge price which m y reasonably be expected fo r range products under
corusarrativo stocking p ra c tic e s .
-21'
f' ' d -.1
Qlloy -md tlte -'inn tTopram
There a re c e rta in necessary adjustm ents to be made in Ilontanet S a g ri­
c u ltu re (1 7 )(5 1 ), th e td iifts to m rd which a re becoming apparent*
The Land
u t i l i z a t i o n Program under the United S ta te e Department o f Aefic u ltu re has
done much to help e f f e c t th e se adjustm ents tlirotif* th e TUrchose o f subm r s in a l la n d s.
An e f f o r t should be made t o
o f crop production so as to
oxce t lo n a lly
e t these lands perm nontl;r ou t
re v e rt another in flu x o f farmers fOUcwing an
ood year o r t m o f molGturo conditions and r i c e s .
Once those
lands a re returned to g razin g , th e problem re m in a o f following: management
p ra c tic e s which w ill most quickly re tu rn th ese a reas to optimum carrying
cap acity fo r liv e s to c k .
In o th er words, th a t procedure i s necessary Khich
w ill g e t th ese lends to producin'; th e g re a te s t q u a n tity o f the most p a la ta b le
nd d e sira b le type o f erm n o n t veget ticm in th e l e a s t p o ssib le tin o .
In o rd er
to do t h i s , th e e co lo g ical oh n c t e r i o t i c o o f th e forage plans to be grown
on th e area must be considered.
wonsorvative grazing I s o f major importance in proper use o f range
Iin d (3 5 ).
uio growth h a b its of th e p la n ts n a tiv e to th e a re a must be
stu d ied and a management plan developed to conform with th ese growth h a b its
so a s to allow proper development, propagation and improvement o f the b e tte r
types o f forage.
For c e rta in ty re s o f forage p la n ts , seasonal use and deferred or
r o ta tio n grazing systems a re e s s e n tia l to range imrTovffi-ont.
However, th e
h a b its o f p lan t growth f o r the p r t lo u l a r type of v e g etatio n (13) growing on
the area should be th e guiding fa c to r in determ ining th e grazing program fo r
th a t a re a .
In some c a s e s , a r t i f i c i a l reseeding is d e sira b le (26) and Greeted
e h eatfru sa i s recommended (14) q u ite h ig h ly . G onaerrative stocking a t i l l
-2 2
tin e i s a b so lu te ly noeeaeiiy to ran^e Inprovaf^ent.
I t n u st b© rcnanbored
thi t o v er-p m aln g , aupnented Iqr heat aid drought, i s vory in ju rio u s to ranges
(2 5 ).
Development of w ater h o le s , sp rin g s, and re s e rv o irs a re p ra c tic e s o f
rtooh vc luo to th e atookm n.
Kot only i s th e a v ailab le water lnportont in
obtaining increased weight to th e liv e s to c k , but i t a ls o prevents t r a i li n g
and i t s atten d a n t damage to range a s w ell a s to prevent extreme over-grazing
on th e a lto s o f w atering plt oec.
Proper d is trib u tio n o f s a l t awry from w ater holes Io an important
in flu en ce in proper d is tr ib u tio n o f liv e sto c k over graaing a re a s .
I t has
been proved th a t stock w i l l go to s a l t as w ell as they w ill to water i f show
th e Ioc itio n o f tho s i ti n g p i cos.
Contour furrow lry i s a p ra c tic e which j u s t i f i e s con sid eratio n in some
aresie o f th e s t a t e , e sp e c ia lly in the d r ie r o r more windy s e c tio n s .
These
furrows d is tr ib u te th e ra in w ater over th e M lla id e o and prevent considerable
ru n -o ff.
This d is trib u tio n holds w ater on th e lan d , giving i t a chance to
p erc o late down in to th e s o i l and i s a fa c to r in preventing w ater erosion and
"gullying* ( 5 ).
Contour furrowing i s a lso a fa c to r in preventing wind
ero sio n and in holding tho snow a s i t d r i f t s over the rid g es and in th e fu r­
rows, ranking considerable m oisture a v a ila b le fo r plant growth a s the snow
r a l t s in th e sp rin g .
The heed fo r ^ u n d and adequate C redit F = O illtlea
Inadequate c re d it f a c i l i t i e s have been a fa c to r o f extreme Importance
to ranch o p eratio n s in Montana.
In the p a st f im e r s and ranchers have boen
handicap ed because o f th e d if f ic u lty in furnishing a standard s e c u rity .
-2 3 -
"%# wide T sirlatlon in product ion cap acity o f th e d iffe re n t u n its , the wide
s read in a b i l i t y o f o p e ra to rs, and th e d i f f ic u lt y of e lim in atin g spcKmlat i r e elem ents, were a l l fa c to rs in re ta rd in g th e flow o f c a p ita l f r m c i t i e s ,
and o th e r p o in ts o f c o n cen tratio n , to th e fa n s.
Aeeordirsg to T o o tell (3 3 ),
" th e re la a d e f in ite need fo r more tra ln ix r in th e buainona aspect of fa m in g " .
Cffcentitioa, debts were accumulated during periods o f ris in g
r ic e s , due to
expansion o f operation even more so than to incrensod co st o f o peration.
These were c a rrie d and paid o f f during periods o f f illin g p ric e s and low in ­
comes.
An in crease in farm and ranch Indebtedness based on a temporary in ­
crease in farm -ric e s, i s an unsound policy and responsible fo r much o f th e
hardship to the rancher a s ho stru g g le s along; with a decreasing income.
This type of c r e d i t , a s exem plified by th e o ld er type of a g ric u ltu ra l
loaning
je n n ie s , i s resp o n sib le fo r a considerable portion o f over-exp maio n ,
increased indebtedness, o v e r-c a p ita llz n t io n , and the a tte n d a n t misuse of r e ­
sources by farm ers and ranchers which, in tu r n , caused the d if f ic u lty of
inducing th e flow o f c r e d it from c e n te rs o f aecumul tio n to th e farm.
O ftentim es, those w ith money to lend hud l i t t l e or no personal
knowledge o f a g ric u ltu r a l o p e ra tio n s.
They accepted loans o f operators a t
g re a t d ista n c e s who ' -ore o p eratin g under conditions u n f u n ili r to them.
The v a ria tio n s in th e d iffe re n t u n its , and t h e i r a b i l i t y to pay, r e u ire
study by a s p e c ia lis t who i s fa m ilia r w ith th e d iffe re n t t pes o f land and
ab le to develop inform ation U K>n th e oh ira e te r of th e borrow er, M s rep u ta­
tio n and a b i l i t y to pay (3 2 ), a s w ell a s h is needs fo r c r e d i t.
In other words,
i t I s necessary fo r the loaning agency to have a s p e c ia lis t on the ground
to go over th e p la n t and discuss c re d it needs o f the o p e ra to r; then, a f t e r
-2 4 -
a c !J1Oful study o f th e u n it :nd o p e ra to r, to make the loan on a b a sis o f
lc r ^ t Ino
roduotlon and a rlo o s.
Iboso thi% '0 were jjn o e a ib le fo r th e in ­
d iv id u a l In th e e a s t who n l i h t otherw ise have boon w illin g to m ke Io ns
i f Se could Skive been reasonably sure o f h ia Investment*
3ank ad Iro duotion C red it
The Federal Lend
sso o ia tlo n s a re a t present o p eratin g under a
systW: which la adequately m ilted to make sh o rt and lo n e -te n s loans to
M’r ic u ltu r e on a sound business basis*
The b io lo g ic a l n atu re of a g ric u ltu re n e c e ssita te d the development
o f c re d it f a c i l i t i e s not found in the e a r l i e r sources o f a g ric u ltu ra l c r e d i t ,
co r were the c re d it needs of
g r I c u ltu re the a me a s those o f I r lustry •
cr
th e se reasons i t wne r oceasiiry th a t sources o f c re d it be developed which
would be su ite d fo r tho s p e c ia l needs of th e farm er and th e n n c h e r (8 ),
The loans o f th e Federal Lend Bank and ■jToductIon C red it A M M iations ore
based u:xm aotnrxl e arning cap c ity of th e p lan t (32) md they attem pt to
'’borrow th e o p erato rs out o f debt" r a th e r than to loan tho I r funds f o r th e
so le u r » se of in te r e s t inocne (8 ).
The extension o f c re d it is m de on a
b a s is adapted to th e needs o f a g ric u ltu re and in v o lv e d
I.
,pproachine loaning Problems f m a th e farmer’ s poin t of
view.
Sg,
dju stin g loan m a tu ritie s , methods of repayment, and other
loan conditions to th e sp e c ia l needs of a g ric u ltu re , and a s
nearly a s possible to the in d iv id u a l needs o f each*
3.
IjTtnriulsg ra p id md convonio t serv ice to borrowers such a s ,
(a) Convenient c re d it se rv ice in a reas d is ta n t from asso­
c ia tio n headquarters whenever th e business i s s u ffic ie n t
'25—
to ju s tif y th e loaning ex -juse.
(b) Lakicg money $nrxliable w ithin a short time a f t e r
a p p llea tlo B ,
(c) Keepinj'-; good c re d it h is to ry on old members so th a t
a p p lic a tio n s c m be handled w ith a ninlmtaa o f ex­
pense and delay,
<.-•
In a is tic g m nbera in b e tt e r business pr c tlo e s ,
(a) Through lo n g -tin e planning o f t h e i r production oper­
a tio n s .
(b) By a methodic I s y s tm o f re c o rd s,
(o) By eeeouraslng arogreosivs pm c t le e s fo r m ch In d iv i­
dual e n te rp ris e .
Krr. e C a ttle ■roduotlon
ra c tlo e s
The d ata upon which t h i s study is based were obtained from th e
ranch reco rd s o f 100 range c a t t l e producers sc a tte re d in a shotgun p a tte rn
over th e s ta te *
Tho study m s conducted by Kr* J?.* II* o under son of th e De­
partment o f ig rio u ltu ra l Economics a t Montana S ta te C ollege.
The study was
made over the fiv e -y e a r period 1929-1933, th e ranch o p erato rs were contracted
a t th e ir hoad u a rte rs fo r rocords of income and ox enso a s m i l as o e r a t Ion
p rn o ticea which wore considered to be p e rtin e n t to tho stu d y .
In seme Cases
th e records o f c e r t if i e d public accountants and bankin'- in s titu tio n s supple­
mented the above*
The a r t t e r c o lle c te d the data fo r 1933 by going in to the fie ld and
co n tactin g th e re n e le re In th e surnner o f 1934, and summarised tho records
-2 6 -
f o r the year 1933.
Ka a ls o m rked cm th e fiv e -y e a r aunm riea o f the
m aterial* compiled th e ta b le s and wrote most o f th e m a te ria l shorn herein
during th e w in ter o f 1934 and 1935,
ial
The ta b le s and considerable o f th e Mater­
shown herein were l a t e r used by l-lr, M* Ha f u n d e r son and L r. D. W, Chit-
tcn d er in th e Montana cric u ltu r a l ixperirsent S ta tio n b u lle tin Ko. 341,
C a ttle RaZtehlng In Montanaf*, and in th e fu tu re w ill be re fe rre d to in th is
th e s is is reference (£3).
■nnuil Operating Coats per Koad
Costs in terras of d o lla rs and c en ts serve the purpose o f a general
index In studying d iffe re n c e s in th e c h a ra c te ris tic s and operating e f f i ­
ciency o f in d iv id u a l ranches,
C ertain q u a lific a tio n s need t o be noted, how­
e v e r, in applying past nonetary and p ric e averages and tren d s to an a n a ly sis
o f th e present o o ra tin g cost d ata o f th e in d iv id u a l ranch ( 3 ),
The f i r s t >nd most obvious o f such
u a lifio a tlo n s i s th a t th e g en eral
p ric e le v e l has in th e p a st been q uite u n stab le and ray continue to be so
In th e fu tu re ,
Tar t h i s reason th e use of in d ices or changes in th e value
o f money i t s e l f ray be necessary in applying th e cost d ata of th e past to
th a t o f th e p re se n t,
A second c u i l i f i c tio n in th e use o f past monetary
coot d ata f o r th e a n a ly sis o f ranch o p eratio n Is the f a c t t h a t , due to
Ch dJgea in production technique or s h i f t s in consumer demand, the value
re la tio n s h ip s of any one kind or type of a g ric u ltu ra l commodity m y , over
a aerieo o f y e a rs, bs more o r le s s p erm n en tly changed,
g a in , i t should be
noted th a t th e production c o sta o f any group o f c a t tl e ranches a re lik e ly to
d i f f e r considerably in any one y e a r, and th e co sta on an Ind iv id u al ranch
m y vary over a s e rie s o f years due to weather d iffe re n c e s.
-2 7 -
The Important oonelderution Ie to have aono standard y a rd stic k by
which V a ria tio n s In In d iv id u al ranch c o sts and lnacme c n be observed and
R e:eared .
These d iffe re n c e s and v a ria tio n s should then be analysed.
kind o f /IrlQ lyais a p p lie s n e ce ssa rily to th e sp ecialized
This
p r lc u ltu ra l pro­
ducer who i s o perating a business e n te rp ris e ra th e r than a s n a il d lv e rs ifie d
fu rilly farm .
For th e ty p ic a l !',ontnna c a t t l e rancli th e use and mnasement o f
resources outweighs th e use o f op erato r I .b ar, c o sts a re la rg e ly expressed
in monetary payments, and th e ty ;e o f o peration Ie s u f f ic ie n tly apeoiallseS
th t a r t i f i c i a l se p a ra tio n o f t o costa of v ario u s e n te rp ris e s o f th e same
buslneos u n it l a c o t necessary ( I ) .
Frtan 1929 to 1933, th e average annual operating c o st per animal u n it
fo r the r tJiol os studied declined frcr. apiroxlr. te ly
by about o n e-fo u rth ,
17.30 to ...13.00, o r
actu ally , during th e f i r s t 5 yo v s of t h i s period, op­
e ra tin g c o sts rose due to r o l a t lr a l y good c u ttle
r i c e s in 1929 and 1930.
This r e f l e c t s tho tren d toward expansion and th e com petition fo r lab o r and
ran g e.
The r a t e o f raigos paid to y ear rotmd ranch help m s about 40.00 a
month In 1929, r a is in g to
45.00 in 1930 and to 250.00 in 1931.
Following
1931, tho low b eef p ric e s forced a sharp reduction In c o st r a te s and some
red u ctio n In th e amounts o f h ired la b o r, s u p p lie s , and purchased foods (mostly
g ra in m d cottonseed cake) used.
Scsne such changes appeared to go fu r th e r
than m a d e sirab le in securing th e most economic re la tio n s h ip between c o s ts
and re tu r n s .
I1
vinderson (23) re p o rts th a t th e avert; ;e annual o p eratin g c o st fo r
th e flv o -y cor period m s about )17.00 per animal u n i t.
Ttilo Includes an
-2 8 -
aocountli^: fo r th e operator* a lab o r tin e a t the cu rren t %agc s c a le .
It
does not include any fig u re fo r man gom nt r e tu r n , any in te r e s t payment upon
borrowed c a p i ta l , o r any I n te r e s t re tu rn to th e owner’ s e q u ity in th e In vootvaent.
The percentage re la tio n s h ip s i n tha v ario u s c o st lte n e fear a l l
o f th e r nchea a t the a t r t and c lo se o f th e fiv e-y o ar
in T :bl© I .
e rio d a re reported
-2 9 -
Table X,
fo r .QDtvna Ranehes, 1929 and 1933 (25)
:
1929
:
1933
j inount: % c f Total* (mount: % o f T otal
I.
2.
3.
4e
5.
6.
Labor
$0.90
Jupplles fo r hired labor
1.95
Feed "uroh ised
1.75
1.75
Leases
i\acoo (ro a l e s ta te ind • ersonal) 2.15
Deprecl tlo n on liaprovecente
and equipment
1.10
7 . General ranch expense
2.70
-!Za-SO-
T o tu l
34
11
10
10
13
#4.20
1.60
1.55
1.20
2.00
33
12
12
9
16
7
15
1.20
1.20
9
9
100
312.95
100
Tnblo I I . Operntln.:: Coata nor
Unit by re g io n s, 1929 to 1933
IkJuntuin :
! Supplies :Feod :
I
:Denre|0 en eral;T u trI
V alley tia b o r:fo r h ire d :p u r- !Leases :Tlxos :e la tio n j n r ch ;co st
:
:la b o r
:chased:
:
:on equip-$ex:
:
:
:______ :_______ :______ m ent
; nonsos :
(33)
:aro ss
:ln :eoa»
:
$5.76
6.38
6.25
5.10
4.02
$1.92
2.13
2.06
1.70
1.34
£1.56
3.17
3.64
3.12
2.24
1.83
1.18
1.25
1.35
U 66
#1.97
2.12
2.08
2.03
1.66
#1.04
1.06
1.07
1.23
1.13
#2.94
3.00
2.58
8.56
1.17
5 -y r.a v e . 5.50
1.63
2.75
1.26
1.97
1.11
2.45
16.87
17.27
F o o th ill
1529
1930
1931
1938
1933
6.05
7.28
7.11
5.17
4.19
2.02
2.63
2.37
2.22
2.06
1.96
1.04
2.18
1.49
1.66
2.03
2.24
1.73
1.81
1.46
1.92
2.32
2.43
2.31
2.12
1.00
1.19
1.28
1.40
1.13
2.37
2.30
2.28
2.09
1.22
17.43
19.00
19.28
16.49
13.84
29.48
20.93
19.29
16.45
12.22
5 -y r.iv e . 5.96
2.26
1.67
1.85
2.22
1.22
2.03
17.21
19.67
I in s
1929
1930
1931
1938
1933
5.87
6.04
6.05
5.07
4.40
1.96
1.99
2.28
1.75
1.47
1.79
1.32
2.31
2.67
0.74
1.39
1.69
2.09
2.39
1.40
2.51
2.61
2.40
2.46
2.26
1.19
1.34
1.19
1.52
1.22
•JB
2.93
2.45
2.22
1.15
17.56
17.92
19.37
ltl.00
12.64
24.29
21.91
0.73
11.52
12.24
S-yr.em i. 5.65
1.89
1.77
1.79
2.45
1.29
2.32
17.15
15.74
1929
1930
1931
1932
1953
§17.02 '25.44
19.04 20.44
10.95 17,67
17.09 12.30
12.24 10.60
-3 0 -
This shows ltibor and tax es as beta*? the two co st I te m having the
,greatest r e s i s t mcf to do.mw.rd change.
s m y bo seen Aom 1Rible I I , th ere ena a o m ll margin during t h i s
flv e - y e ir e rlo d to c arry in te r e s t charges in the mountain v a lle y :nd to o th i l l ranches, and none on the p la in s ranches.
th e b est
a rg ln .
The t o o th ill ranches show
Tt-,e eountaln v lle y ranches do a considerable amount o f
w irto r fa tte n in g o f s te e rs and dry cows on n ativ e hoy, and market a con­
sid e ra b le pereentege of t h e i r liv e sto c k a t west coast m arkets.
o f a r e la tiv e ly u rfa v o r b le market
Tl:e e ffe c t
ric e s itu a tio n Which developed in these
markets in 1932 and 1933 m y bo noted in th e income to r the fie ranches.
Tho
o f f a i t o f a severe drcvJht upon p ric e s and I r core may be noted to r th e
p la in s r iAhos In 1931.
H-c higher gross income o f the f o o th ill ranches r e ­
f l e c ts th o lr n a tu ra l tdv irtag e in being able to produce a good weight and
q u a lity of market and feeder animals* A r e la tiv e ly high ta x cost s itu a tio n
may be noted f o r the p la it a ranches where I nd values .rd t
jc«3
have been
more influenced by farming development.
There i s not any marked d iffe re n c e in th e t o t a l o
th ese th ro e regions of th e s t a t e .
r a tin g c o sts fo r
Tho average ranch p rice of till c a t tl e mar­
keted fo r a l l of th e ranches stu d ied m s s lig h tly le s s than 6.00 per Iamdradweight to r th e 1929-19&3 perio d .
s lig h tly over '7 .0 0 as th
1910 to 1930.
This ooopared with an average o f
ivere.-m Mtmtana ranch p rice o f b e ef c a t tl e from
vn overage ranch p ric e o f
7.00 »tn be expected to y ie ld a
gross I come o f about 20.00 per u n it o f range c u ttle c o rated on a ranch
with 100 head o r nore o f c a t t l e .
» gross Inoo o o f t h i s amount w ill ro ju ir a th a t th e operating c o st
does not exceed 515.00 per c a t t l e u n it in order to y ie ld a fiv e per cent
in to oat re tu rn upon a reasonable Invoatnent.
The Investment values which
the ranch o p erato rs placed upon t h e i r p ro p e rtie s in 1930 amounted to ap­
proxim ately $150.00 per c a t t l e u n i t.
S ix ty d o lla rs of t h i s was the u n it
v ilu e placed upon c a t t l e , $65.00 upon land (not including th e value of
leased lan d , which amounted to from o n e-th ird to o n e-h alf o f the range land
u se d ), and th e balance o f th e investment was in equipment, fee d , work sto c k ,
e tc .
These undoubtedly represent in fla te d values fro® th e stand o ln t o f
lo n g -tin e tre n d s .
n earer
A reasonable In v estre n t per c a t t l e u n it in land would be
40.00 ehon o n e -th ird to on e-h alf o f the range land i s leased , or
'60.00 i f a l l land used i s owned.
The long-tim e tren d o f u n it investment
values in Montana r.mge c a t tl e i s between ,40.00 and . 45.00.
In th e s itu a ­
tio n most n e a rly ty p ic a l o f th e ranches stu d ie d , where a p a rt o f t h e i r land
co st i s in le a se s p a id , th e t o t a l c a p ita l investment per c a t t l e u n it should
not g re a tly exceed $100.00 and tho average annual operating coat ie r c a t t l e
u n i t , not including th e in te ro a t re tu rn to t h i s investm ent, should not ex­
ceed $15.00.
k v a ria tio n up to 30 per cent e ith e r way from t h i s average co st
fL -ure m y be j u s tif ie d fo r in d iv id u a l ranches (23).
This i s about th e ex­
treme lim it of d iffe re n c e s due to d iffe re n c e s in the c h a r a c te r is tic s and
o aerating methods of th e ranches. Any g re a te r v a ria tio n than t h is above
the average i s lik e ly to In d icate excessive and waste c o s ts on th e one hand;
o r I f le s s than 70 per cent of the average, i s very lik e ly to in d ic ate th e
u n certain use o f unpaid-for range la n d , a low production of w inter feed o r
o th e r hazardous a aerating methods.
Jome of th e mountain v a lle y ranches th a t
-3 2 -
wor© do ng a ecmolderable m ount o f w inter fa tte n in g on n e tIvo hny bad an
operating c o st as Kuoh as 30 per cent above th e averts© , w ith a co rres­
pondingly h i her in c o re .
There wore Icsfcxnoes o f p la in s ranches marketing
foodor o alvee and y e a rlin g s and using noese g ra in to in crease rxirkot r e ig h ts
th a t co Id j u s t if y an o perating cost 20 to 30 par cent above the average.
Ag i n , th e re wire c e rta in o f the la rg e r ran ch es, e a p e o ia lly in th e fo. t h i l l
and p la in s reg io n s, engaged p rim arily in tlie running o f s te e rs purchased
f r m o u tsid e sources a t a u n it cost 20 to 30 per cent below the average,
and g e n e ra lly with a correspondingly lower gross inoono.
Tkeoe were gen­
e r a lly ranches w ith a type o f range where the topography, w ater, and range
feed co n d itio n s were In h eren tly b e tto r
lip te d to s te e rs than to ecus.
Production Posts by Type of Animal
An a n aly sis o f the ranch records a s to production c o sts fo r th e
period 1629-1933 shows th a t th e re a re no wide d iffe re n c e s in th e per hun­
dredweight c o sts fo r c a lv e s , y e a rlin g s , or two- and th re e -rn a r-o ld s te e r s .
Yearling animals showed the lowest pioduotion costa per hundredweight in
a l l tliree ro g io n s.
Ti e f o o t h il l ranches showed the lowest production c o st
fb r th e fee d er calves m rk e te d , th e mountain v Ile y ranches the l o w s t
c o st fb r th e y e a rlin g s and tw o-year-old s te e rs marketed.
The fa c t th a t the
f o o t h il l ranches had the lowest production co st fo r calv es wtis due primar­
i l y to t h e i r higher par emit c a lf cro p .
reduction c o sts per hundredweight
run c o n s is te n tly higher fo r a l l c la sse s o f animals on th e p la in s ranches
( able I I I ) .
he weight o f the th ree -y u ar-o ld s te e rs merkotod f r a the
mountain valley mnohes does not alio*, a gain from the tr.o-yoar-old w eights
-3 3 -
oomr<ip:ible to th e o th e r roglone.
" h is Io due r l r r l l y to the
t
c tlo #
on sene o f th ese r .nohos o f i-arfeetlng t h i s c la s s o f em lm ls aa tfcree-ye?iroldo In th e sp rln a of th e y » ir a f t e r w in ter foodInc on n a tiv e hoy, ra th e r
than o ff the ranae a s "IcMtTw th.roe-yetr-oldo In the f a l l .
Table I I I . Goats*
nd ;elr,hta fo r D iffere n t 4Tee of J a t t l o ITartotod»19^0-33 ( 3)
"ISttntaia'' FbotiilUL Plalne
Valley
TianWms Hanohm
PanohQS
e ig h ts of oalvec m v lo to d (In lb o .)
425
405
385
Production c o s ts o f calv es narkotod
#86.00
322.50
24.00
Production OGa te per cnet. o f Oilvos
5.90
5.90
6. 5
ol.3ht3 o f yoarlltifTS r irketed (In lb a .)
735
684
GOO
roduotlon c a ts o f yo irlln -a tt rhotod
37.00
37.50
39.00
T xluotIon sc a ts per cist, o f J e a rlin r1G
5.05
5.30
5.90
920
685
52.80
53.00
5.70
6 .0 0
e l "its o f 2—y r . old s te e r s marketed (in l b a .) 965
reduction c o a ts o f 3 -y r. old otoora rsarteted 52.00
rodu o tIon c o sts n r c s t . o f 2 -y r. old a to o rs
5.25
o lrh ta o f 3 -y r. old a tu e rs msrkctod (In lbo.)1190
HB5
1090
roduotlon c o s ts o f 3 -y r. old s te e rs marketed 69.00
66.00
67.00
Production c o sts par cert, o f 3 -y r. old s t e w s
5.80 i
6.15
5.80
i Ooes not include any I n t w s s t charge
The ,'reduction c o a ts shorn In Table H I do not Include any charge
f o r l n t c re st , e ith e r on nor,ay cued or on th e ownership e q u ity .
A 5 per cent
I n te r e s t charge u on a reasonable Investment would odd o p p rcx im tely
1.25
<er h u 'dredvelaht to ti e c o st o f C alves, 1 . 23 f r y e a z lln s s , $1.40 fear
W o-ycor-old a to o rs ,
nd
1.60 fo r th ro c-y eu r-o ld s te e r s .
The necessary
-K 4 -
flv e -y e a r average s o i l Iz^ p ric e s per huntirodtsolght a t t i e raach t o cover
o o e ts, Including th ese ln to ro a t charges f o r th e period 1929-1930 xmuld
Mve been:
Table 17, Flve-Tenr A iw sge S e llin g P rice per Out* a t Mnoh
to Cover goats Plus In to ro st a t 6 Per Ooct ( 3)
Aount In
F tiO th in
P la in s
Punches
T u lley
Ranches
B TkQhBQ
r ic e per ew t. fear calves
r ic e per c a t. f o r y e a rlin g s
37.13
#6.75
#7.50
6.30
6.55
7.15
r ic e
or c* t . fo r 2 -y r. old otoors
6.65
7.10
7.40
r ic e
s r crTt. f o r 3 -y r. old s te e r s
7.40
7.40
7.75
This zdiotsB t h a t th e In to r1OSt carry in g chrirgo beoam o a s ig n ific a n t
I ta a in th e production o f th ree -y ea r-o ld s t e e r s , and t h a t they m a t brine*
h ig h er p rice s :ior hundredrrol^t than o th er cloeeoa o f a n lm ls In o rd er to
ocver coots and an I n te r e s t r e tu rn .
Tise nooess ry p ric e d if f e r e n tia l be­
tween y a rlln g o and tn o g rear-o ld s t e e r s I s not so Burked, but i t I s s t i l l
s l r n l f le a n t.
Soae ran ch es, bee use o f n a tu ra l ad ap tatio n fo r the vToductlon
o f too— md th re o -y e e r-o ld (or dleudvantagos fo r e th e r ty p e s o f production)
a l l l probably continue t o fled t h i s type o f production th e noet p ro fita b le .
la b o r Costa
Due to dlffcrenoeo in th e cargunlsatlon and operating methods o f th e
r inohes, th e re was a r a th e r lazge v a ria tio n betyoen in d iv id u a l r JX&ea in
th e m ount o f lab o r tin e used on th e ranch per u n it o f liv e s to c k .
IM s
v r i i t Ion shown m e rre u to r than th e a c tu a l v;irla tio n in c o s ts , due t o th e
-3 5
f c t tb t "lirotvised feeds displaced ranch lab o r to a R reuter extent on
some ran ch es.
There wero In d lv ld u d Instances o f s n a il ranches with 100
to 125 head o f c a t t l e where the operator* s lab o r time w o i l l th a t m s
used throughout th e y e a r.
Most o f th e ranches were ab le to handle about
t h i s n ny head of liv e sto c k per nan year o f Libor tin e .
r nehes,
A few o f th e la rg e r
u r tic u la r ly those marketing two- .nd th re e -y e a r-o ld s te e r s , were
able to go considerably above t h i s .
Many of th e sm aller ranches of from
100 to 200 head o f liv e sto c k found sane d if f ic u lty In working out in econ­
omic combination of op erato r and hired lab o r tim e.
Some o f the ranches
stu d ied had supplemental income-producing e n te rp ris e s fo r th e use o f any
excess lab o r t i r e .
Table V, The verages and V ariatio n s in th e Kissber o f C a ttle
Run Per Man Year of Labor Time During the Flve-Ye <r Period
Mountain
F b o th lll
V alley
Ranches
Ranches
Highest number handled per m n year of
lab o r time
Loiveat number handled o r m n year of
lab o r time
vor ige number handled o r m n year of
lab o r time
U nits
(23)
P la in s
Ranches
150
180
65
70
60
125
120
no
190 .
The low average numbnr handled per man year in th e p la in s group r e ­
f l e c t s the influence o f a la rg e r percentage o f small ranches In th is group.
There were th ree very larg e ranches In th e f o o th ill region th a t Jero handling
a s high
a 250 head o f liv e sto c k (s te e rs ) per m n year of lab o r time (th ese
records a re not Included in Table V)•
-S G -
LaraS Gh irRQS
The Land ohargoa os these panehes tak e the fo ra o f lcuaoa paid on
leasod lands* taxes )ild on owned la n d . In te r e s t on land indebtedness, and
fo r purposes o f s t a t i s t i c a l c a sp irla o n , an in te r e s t re tu rn inflated (In
T iolaticm o f orthodox eoom nlc theory) to th e owner's e q u ity b sod on * a t
appear to be reasonable land v a lu e s.
The land eharge e n te rs in to th e d e-
tom iru tio n o f th e coots o f c r a s s , hay, and o th e r feeds
-r educed.
P r a o tie a lly a l l o f tho ranches stu d ied ovsned a l l o f t h e i r hay and
o th e r crop lands and acre ranee lan d .
%s m y bo noted in
oiderablo pereeetage o f range land was le a se d .
able T I, a exsn-
About ono-balf o f th e m a n -
ta in v a lle y and f o o t h il l ranches had su m e r grazing p e ra ito on th e T ntioi i l
vO reatt consequently tho pereemtanc o f leased land i s a c tu a lly acmrdiat
hlf'har f a r te e e e pfinabes than i s shown by Table T I, w? ieb accounts only f o r
range Izinds where th e r-.otm&t used could be d e te rn ln o d .
About t n o -th ird s
o f th e p la in s ranches had some use o f an ln d e te m ln a te amount o f opm range
in 1933.
Lmee p ric e s cm range I n d did not d e clin e to any considerable ex­
te n t from 1929 to 1933.
I f a U o f th e m age land used and paid fo r had boon
secured a t th e p rices paid on leased ran g e, the annual coot o f th e g rass
p er Cf l r o l u n it would have been about ^2J K ( in c lu d in ’ fo re s t grazing foes)
fo r th e mountain V J l e y ranches, 33.25 fb r f o o th ill ra n c h e s, and 32.05 fo r
th e p la in s ranches.
This con-ares with a cost o f a c tu a l loaoos nnd tax e s
a id on r -nge lan d , p lu s fiv e per cent ln to ro s t retu rn on th o reasonable
vzilue o f otmed ran g e, o f four to fiv e d o lla r s an a n im l u n it a s an average
f b r a l l of th e ranches durln * th e fiv e -y e a r period (2 3 ).
This shorn a eon-
-3 7 -
sld e m b le d ifferen c e In c o st between th e le is e d and the ovneti range.
The In d ica tio n s e re th a t under co n :o tI tiv o c o n d itio n s, the range stockmen
w ill pay in one form o r an o th er, 30 to 35 cen ts an animal u n it per month
fo r g raz in g .
T his i s an average over a s e rie s o f y e ars.
I f grazing c o sts
on lea se s on public lands a re m eh below t h is p o in t, th e d ifferen c e w ill be
c a p ita liz e d Into the value o f th e hay and range lands owned by th e operator
and e v en tu ally appear as a coat through t h i s channel.
Table VI. Range and Hay Land Used and Leased, 1929-1933 (23)
P la in s
F o o th ill
Mountain
Punches
Ranches
V alley
Ranches
e ra s of r nfe land per c a t t l e u n it*
verage p ric e paid per acre on leased land
11
.22
17
.19
25
.1 1 ’
tverage aor cent o f range land leased
35
40
55
c re s o f hay and crop land per c a t t l e u n it
1.2
1.0
1.0
•Does not Include H utional Fbreat or grazing rese rv e s.
__________
Haneh iKumber
Case $ o f
Re. : C u ttle
$U nits
:
:
:
$
Table VXI1 Gr--Zli-- Costs on IndiT ldutl Panchea (23)
:T o tal tores:A cres jCost per:P er acre $Annual oostiG ost o f graa-xT otal : vg. :Grazing
ic f c o n tro l-: of
:acro o f : Talue
:p er acre of sing e m i t on: annual t number: cost
:le d range : leased : leased : placed by teeing owned: fo re s t or
t#ara»»
: of
men
: exclusive :range : range
(Operator : range In
jg ra a ln - d ls - jin®
idays jday
jo f fo re s t :
son rm ge :tax es and s t r i c t .
:
ioost
: on
jr.er
sland
! in te re s t
:
:
'
:Ho. & co st
:per head:,grass (head
:d is tr ic ts :
icrnned
t(6 t)
i per head
:
j
;
:
: perm ite
:by him
:
:
:
:
J
:
:
$10.00
80f
100
75f
•2.50
245
l.O f
7D(f
8.00
60f
800
65f
2.45
215
I .If
8,180
2A4
5.00
37f
650
69f
4.05
315
1 .3 f
8,200
4,000
2X4
5.00
37f
500
88f
4.60
295
l.G f
1090
25,140
640
1(#
2.50
20f
620 1.10
5.10
310
1 .7 f
370
7,000
4,500
2.00
16f
300 1.85
3.15
£75
1 .2 f
745
2,100
1,000
W
1310
4,000
2,000
3 b/
730
9,670
4 b/
650
5£/
6 S/
15
/
2
a / fo u n tain v U ey
b / F o o th ill
jg/ P lain s
I
-3 9
The d iffe re n c e s In th e c o st o f grazing on leased range conpfired
with ring® owned by the op erato r a re f a rth e r lliu e trtito d by the In d iv id u al
ranch coot d ata shown In Table V H .
Records Iloae I and 2 Qhcw a a trlk ln g
exceptIon to th e usual s itu a tio n , however. These ranches a re loo ited in
th e 31g Hole Basin In Beaverhmd County, which is an area efcere the lilgh
e I e m t Icn and r e la te d o l l m t l o fa c to rs have caused I t to r era in as s t r i c t l y
a range liv e sto c k type o f ocnnunlty.
The rtKmlt has been Iotas* land v in e s
and tax es in r e la tio n to th e OtamytBs cap acity of the ra n g e ,
liote t h a t
th re e two records show an average r ngo use (exclusive o f fo re s t porr.lt)
Cf
t h ree s e re s to th e head.
n a tiv e p a stu re .
T his i s ir r ig a te d and s o b -irrig a te d
The le a se r a t e s paid for t h i s land appear high on an aero
b a s ic , but th e re s u ltin g per day gracing c o s t Is lotxar th an on m a t o f th e
dry range la n d s.
This s itu a tio n a s to th e lower c o st of grazing on omod
r '.-.go Cqkp r e d wltft In sod range I s , tm e v e r , an exceptional one, and t h i s
la th e only are a o f th e s t a t e th e re ouch a re la tio n s h ip m s in d ic ate d .
coords ' o s . 3 and 4 o f Table Y I l a re located i n th e f o o t h il l reg io n
and i t m y be noted t h a t , a t t!*s v a lu e s o f th e owned range a t which th e
o o ra to rs Indio ited they would be w illin g t o s e l l (1931), the co sta per
e re on owned range a re considerably higher th m th e leased range.
The
q u a lity and c irrytog eapaolty o f th e two kinds of range were about the sone.
coords Mos* S and 6 nro p la in s r nc'res, and on both of th ese th e coot of
owned range i s tw ice th a t o f th e leased ra n g e .
Ponch no. 6 has a r e m i t
on a grazing d i s t r i c t f o r m a t o f th e s to c k a t a p rice which reduces the
t o t a l arJTtxal » r hoed co st of (raz in g to q u ite an e x te n t.
There I s a s t a r t l l n r d lfforonoe in th e c o s t o f m aintaining a range
-4 0 -
?m lm l on ran^e compared w ith hay.
Kost range o perators appreol »te th is
d ifferen c e and do not m aintain t h e i r herds on hay during th e w inter months
longer than i s Decessaiy.
An a c tu a l measurement of t h is d ifferen c e in cost
shows th e economy (3 ), however, o f management of rm g e so a s to shorten th e
length of the period of w inter hay feeding a s much aa p o ssib le .
Ctie of th e
reasons fo r feeding hay i s a c tu a l lack o f g rass ra th e r th an lack of a v a il­
a b i l i t y o f i t due to snow cover.
-< comparison of th e per day grazing c o sts
shown in Table VII w ith the per day hay c o sts shown in Table IX shows th a t
the maintenance co st on hay i s th re e to s ix times as c o stly as on g ra s s.
These co sts of m aintaining an animal on hay a re based e n tir e ly upon th e per
to n ranch c o st of producing th e hay and do not include th e labor co st o f
feed in g .
This d ifferen c e a lso In d ica te s the margin fo r the use o f cotton­
seed cuke or o th er range supplements to lengthen grazing periods when g rass
i s av ailab le.
Kay and Feed Costa
There Ie a larg e v a ria tio n in th e amount o f hay fed and th e length
of w inter feed period fo r th e ranoheo o f th e th re e regions (Table V III).
The high average d a ily amount fed on th e mountain v a lle y ranches (nearly £0
pounds per c a t t l e u n i t ) , r e f l e c t s t h e p ra c tic e of doing some w inter fa tte n ­
ing o f s te e r s
nd dry cows on n ativ e hay.
,bout o ne-half o r more of th e
ranches in a l l th re e a re a s fed some g ra in to the calves during th e w inter
iontks.
s shown in Table V H I, th ere was a larg e v a ria tio n in th e prac­
tic e o f In d iv id u al ranches as to th e mount o f g rain fe d .
not
Tho g ra in v*ts
reduced on th e mnehes as a ru le , but was g en erally purchased from
OaSh r tin farms o r g ra in d ealers in th e lo c a lity .
The r iC tic o o f buy-
Ing O ntst
and o tl.e r em ail grnlna f o r t h i s purpose Indlcxtee an
economic In te r-re la tio n s h ip between range liv e sto ck production by rfuic! ec
and r In production by farm #,
'll.Q c o st o f g rx ln and cottonseed coke p u r-
ChiBed I s shorn in Table I under T e e d purchased".
T his co st Item does
cot Include the nuroh ae o f "uoh hoy since but few o f tho ranchers bought
bay; HowovmrtI t does include s a l t .
As sh o w by Table V IlIt a imrher o f
th ese ranchos fed ease g ra in and cottonseed eako, g en erally as a range and
w in ter feed supplem ent, to OOftS.
Table V H I.
VertXpo Use o f Winter Waeda and r:anrre ■uppl-nonta (CS)
Plclms
Mountain
F o o th ill
’ atjches
Pxnoheo
V alley
Ptnohcs
r ounds o f hay par anI m l u n it
1300
1650
1140
Btiriber o f d .ys o f w inter feeding period
120
100
90
Percentage o f r inches feeding g ra in t o
c Ives {%)
45
60
45
In d iv id u a l r-mch v a ria tio n s in m ounts
o f r in fed per c a l f ( lb s .)
30-190
Tcrcestage of r aches feeding m in and
cottonseed cake to cows (, )
15
In d iv id u al ranch v a ria tio n s in amount o f
g ra in and cottonseed cake fed peer
COW (%>G.)
.P5-100
50-200
35
25-160
50-250
25
50-230
Hanoh : Aoroe of
Case jir r ig a te d
Bo.
:hay land
j
I
Table H
: ores of
:dry hoy
sand crop
:land
$
, Hay Qoata on Individual Hanohes (Average 1959-1933) (33)
sHay Production Costs por Ton :Hay fed near :7Iay cost :KUtiber
i Withoutland : Including
;o a ttie u n it i per
:o f Anya
j charge
: land charge
:(approxlm- : c a t tl e
:w inter
j
i
sate amounts, lim it
:feeding
i
:
:in tons)
:
!
!Coat o f hay
:per day per
!C attle u n it
:fo r days on
Jhay feed
i a/
1500
32.15
35.10
1.50
$7.50
120
6.2*
B a/
2500
1.95
4.15
1.85
7.90
150
5.3*
3 b/
150
300
5.85
8.25
.40
3.40
50
6.9*
4 b/
200
100
5.75
8.15
O
m
.
4.15
70
5.8*
5 o/
500
-
4.25
6.50
.50
3.10
55
5.6*
6 c/
105
95
4.10
6.70
.50
3.55
75
4.7*
-4 3 -
Th# d iffe re n c e s In per ton ooats o f producinc hay on in d iv id u al
r nohos i s shown by Tsblo DC* Those r-nob oases a re t i e ewse and o c rro s pon<5 by nutibor to th e ranch grazing c o st data in Table T C .
Raatfiea Too.
I and 2 put up n a tiv e hr.y farm lyrgo f ie ld s and uao Iorge aenle and poner
e
In th e fo ra o f la rg e hay ra k e s or nBmMpon and "bsavorolide'*
s t iokoaro, rI s o power b u l lr dtes
rd nan-tors to see a e x te n t.
Baefcsmleal povsesr
a uipridct i s not used to any e x te n t; hosever, i t se e rs to be gaining in I n port-m os.
The p ra c tic e on th ese r aches i s to llvlde t; e i r o a ttle in to a
range h erd , and a b e e f herd in th e f a l l o f the y e a r.
The anim als in the
former .-aro -IrLter fed n t l v e hay a t a r a t e o f 16 to Jfl pounds d a ily .
la tto r
' Po
*e fed a t th e r te o f 88 to 24 pounds <fcilly.
Rrnes OQ ’ or. 3 and 4
ro in am a r m ttio re h y production c o sts eme
h lp h , but range i s o o epum tlvely good _nd '-onem lly adapted to a lo re graz­
ing so son.
GcmsoquoKtlyf w hile the productIcm c o sts
hirjh, th e c o st p er a n lm l i s not out o f l i n e .
tot
ton o f bay a re
; r.oT ea i o s . 5 end 5 a re in
th e p lain s region o f th e s t a t e .
JTmipisont Po re e l ,tio n Coats
The annual d e p re cia tio n m e t on buildings and Im ro v ar.m ts and baying
equipment v a rie d botvseon 50 oonts end
T
ro b es.
1.90 per a n lr a l u n it In c i t t l e on tlm
This v i r ia ti o n was due p rim arily to v a ri ations i n the invest" ont
c o sts in tihono i t m o .
Sore r Lnohes bad a lo c a tio n and a ty e o f o p eratio n
whiefe r e u ire d w r y l i t t l e Inveotnont I r s h e lte r .
here m s a n o ticeab le
tendency f o r th e an. JULer rar.dhea to s u b s titu te ltibcr tin e fu r InvcatreBb in
haying machinery and M hor types o f Idbcr-eavlBg e
i iT m t.
Ran-Q Sheep Production i-r-aotlcea
The d ata upon Which t h i s study is based were obtained trass, the
ranch records o f 100 r a n -e sheep producers sc a tte re d widely over the a t to ,
TJje study was conducted by Mre K, He Saunderson o f the Department o f agri­
c u ltu r a l
conanics a t Montana S ta te Collegee The study vaa made fo r th e
fiv e -y e a r period 1928-1932; the ranch operators were contacted a t th e ir
headquarters fo r records o f income and expense, as w ell a s operation prac­
tic e s .
The records o f c e r tif ie d public accountants and banking in s titu tio n s
were used in some eases a s supplemental sources of data.
The w rite r worked on the fiv e -y e a r summaries o f t h i s m ateria l (36)
in th e w inter o f 1933 and 1934*
The fob le a shown h erein were compiled from
unpublished d ata o f th is stu d y , unless otherw ise indie te d , and w ill here­
in a f te r bo re fe rre d to by the reference number (38) o f t h i s p u b lic atio n .
Tor fu rth e r inform ation see p u b licatio n of Saunderson and Vinke (20), "The
,concmicG o f Range Sheep Production".
Range Sheep Prodtnstlon
The slao of th e u n its in th e p la in s area of Mont nu, which produces
ahoeo as a major e n te rp ris e , v a rie s from o u t f i t s running 1,000 to 30,000
head.
Some of th ese ranches have as supplem ental e n te rp ris e s th e
o f c a t t l e In which, th e numbers vary from 50 to 350 head.
reduction
A cropping pro­
gram in some cases supplements th e liv e sto c k e n te rp ris e and c o n sists In th e
main of wheat
reduction (20),
3ome fa c to rs o f importance in d eto rain in g the e x ten t of operations
r e la tiv e to numbers o f sheep run a re the economic use o f and a v a ila b ility
o f.
-4 5 -
1*
EquipBiont and lab o r.
2.
Conditions of land ten u re.
3« Mariigeriiil a b ility and fin a n c ia l resources.
4.
Physical eha rn c te ris t i e s o f th e country in which opera­
tio n s a re t o take p la c e , such ao a balance of range
re so u rc e s, hay production p o s s ib i l i ti e s , and th e possi­
b i l i t y of organizing a n a tu ra l ranch u n it.
Probably the most im portant of th ese is the fin a n c ia l organization
and m anagerial a b i l i t y o f th e o p erato r, followed by p hysical c h a ra c te ris­
t i c s o f the p la n t.
The siz e of bands v a rie s from 1,000 to 1,500 head o f ewes w ith lnribs
on summer ran g e, la rg e ly depending upon th e type o f country where they are
ru n .
I f the country i s f a i r l y open, le v e l, o r r o llin g , the la rg e r bands
a re ru n s a t i s f a c t o r i l y , but i f th e country i s badly broken o r otherw ise a r­
ranged so th a t th e sheep become e x sily sep arated , th e lower fig u re s m y be
more s a tis f a c to ry ,
however, in th e p la in s area bands o f 1200 head of owes
w ith JLaabs should be the minimum s iz e in most cases and i s considered to
be th e operating u n i t.
On ranches running two bands or more c e rt in com­
b in a tio n s cam be worked out th a t w ill make p o ssib le more complete use of
la b o r, equipment and reso u rces.
There are c e rta in fixed co ats of overhead
and production for one band in th e way o f improvements, equipment and labor
which i ay be u tiliz e d by and charged to the a d d itio n a l b .nde.
Some o f th e management p ractices which a re worked t o advantage a re ,
I.
Sorting sheep according to a g e s , running these in
se p ara te bands and thus more completely u til i z i n g the
-4 6 -
Vfirioua types o f range -nd feed , ra n s , l ribicg siioda, a te .
2*
Store otan- l e t e use and apeo ialljsatio n of labor and equip­
ment In ranch in;- o 'e r a t Iona.
Considering these factor® , th e economic s iz e fo r Qhtwp o u t f it s
vjDuld be two w inter bands o f ewes; the s iz e o f these w ill vary froe 1800
to 3200 o r 8500 head.
This would allow fo r th re e b nda o f ewes with IaWbs
on summer range and th e g re a te r p a rt o f th e equipment noceaeary t o handle
on- band oi Id s t i l l be ade u a te .
1Khe a d d itio n o f a range t a t t l e e n te rp ris e w ill make possible a m r e
complete usu o f range and fee d .
The sheep f a l l to u t i l i z e to pood advant- ge
th e tope of haystacks, some o f th e c o a rse r hay, c e rta in o f th e coarser
roughage, and c e rta in ty >e$i o f th e range land w ill be a a t le f iC to rily used
by c a t t l e wfceroas they would be o f l i t t l e use to the sheep,
also th e re I s
d ifferen c e in r e u lrcn e n ta of seasonal la b o r.
Uheat production can work in n ic e ly w ith a liv e sto c k program in
a reas euitod to who t production.
Such a combination w ill make possible
more n early y e ar round use of la b o r, more complete use o f equipment and
vork sto ck , and provide
a d iv e rs ific a tio n o f income.
Is o , in poor years
th e g ra in crop might be used advantageously f o r liv e sto ck feed .
Annual O 'ccratlm doe to je r road
Costs in te rn s o f d o lla rs and cen ts a re shown in t h i s study to r th e
pur o se o f
Iving a g en eral index fo r studying the d iffe re n c e s in the d m r-
iio to ris tic a and operating e ffic ie n c y of In dividual ranches.
Gert in
u a ll-
f lc itio n a need to be considered in applying p a st monetary cost and m ice
-4 7 -
aTQriigos to fan a n a ly sis o f present o o ra tin g co st data fo r in d iv id u al
rantihes (20)#
Tho im portant oonalderation i s to have acme measure a s a b asis fo r
Offl- 1irieon o f th e co ats and lncones o f not only th e two a re a s of th e s t a t e ,
b u t also o f th e in d iv id u al operators w ithin those a re a s .
fo r t eue d ifferen c e s and v a ria tio n s should be analyzed.
hon th e reasons
These analyses
a ply n e c e ssa rily to th e sp e c ia liz e d a g rie u ltu r o l producer o perating a b u si­
ness e n te rp ris e r a th e r than to the d iv e rs ifie d op erato r on a sm all fam ily
fa ro .
Durinr, th e years 1928 to 1932, th e average o perating co st t e r head
(See Table X) fo r the ranches studied declined s lig h tly in excess of 47
ter c e n t.
h i 'h
Operating ex :>enao8 rose from 1928 to 1929 duo to th e r e la tiv e ly
r ic e s received fo r lnmbs and wool.
This r e f l e c t s th e com petition fo r
lab o r and range a s w ell a s th e tendency to expand during periods of ris in g
r ic e s #
ge r a te s fo r ranch and sheep lab o r rose from 70.00 e-r month
in 1927 to
and to
75.00 in 1928, but declined to ;6S.OO in 1929, $50.00 in 1930
36.00 jrul $30.00 in 1931 and 1932, re s p e c tiv e ly .
Following the
sharp d eclin e in wool and lamb p ric e s th a t began in 1929 and continued
through th e period i t m s necessary to reduce c o sts of o o ra tio n through
u n it c o sts io w e ll is through u n it inp u t o f Items o f expense.
The average annual operating co st fo r th e fiv e -y e a r neriod m s about
4.80 o r head o f ewes run in th e interncm ntain rogiofc and $4.06 in th e
p la in s region (3yo Table XI).
O perator la b o r m e fig u red a t th e cu rren t
wage r a t e and included in c o st o f o p e ra tio n .
I n te r e s t on borrowed c a p ita l
-4 8 -
o r Oimarf S e q u ity was c o t Included In the ",bore fig u re , near m s any re tu rn
Imputed I b r masgement return#
M
l
Table Xt The .Wrttge R elationship o f th e Various Per Hmd Cost !te n s
o f a l l R :nehes Studied in the two ,Xreas a t th e Beginning npA
_
CIoao of the Study (SB)
____ _
7 T
1SG8
:
1932
In tera o u n ta in Togicm
£
: Per cent £
:Ter cor.t
£/«muz$t : o f t o t a l
:o f t o t a l
1#
2.
3#
4#
5#
6.
7#
8#
L Vbtar
Supplies fo r h ired lab o r
Food furohaeed
XUto and trucking
inch su p p lie s and expense
Le nses
Taxes
DeraeOOiatioc an bldqa. and o u i p .
T o ta l
2 .3 ?
.76
1.28
.39
.73
.36
.40
.30
36
12
18
6f
U
6
&L
4
'1.16
.SG
.37
.28
.33
.32
.36
.09
34
11
11
5
10
9:
io r
9
'0.40
100
3.59
100
Labor
Supplias fo r h ired lab o r
Xied purchased
uto tied trucking
Ro oh su p p lies and expoase
Leases
Taxes
rX tpreelatlon on b ld g s, nd equip.
2.17
.72
.94
.19
.54
.43
•40
.21
39
13
17
3
10
7
3
.86
,.28
.35
.15
.21
.20
.22
.19
35
11
10
6
9
12
9
6
T ota
5.60
100
2.46
100
P la in s Regicm
I.
2#
3#
4#
5.
6#
7#
8.
e
-4 9 -
I
Table XI, vVera^e O peratise Coata Per Read by Pocions
__________________ IS C-19.33 ( JG)
___
:
:Foed
$
!Ranch
:
:
:Depr. on;
YmriLubor :Board*: & : &
:3tip. & :ie a s e s : Taxes iild g s . &:
*
$
SalS Itrm km : BXoenaeei
i& u is . i
In tem o u n tain
1928 $2.37
.76
1.18
.39
.36
.40
.30
.73
1.02
1929 2.15
.58
.74
.28
.30
.36
.30
.63
.23
1950 1.90
.62
.42
.34
.35
.30
1931 1.36
.40
.35
.17
.27
.33
.29
.34
.26
1932 1.16
.33
.32
.37
.16
.36
.29
T otal
Cpea*.
Cost
6.49
5.81
4.79
3.53
3.39
.58
.71
.25
.46
.33
.56
.30
4.80
.72
•66
.31
.29
.28
.94
.92
.52
.44
.25
.19
.17
.15
.14
.15
.54
.54
.32
.31
.21
.43
.43
.44
.44
.30
.40
.40
.40
.26
.22
.21
.21
.20
.19
.19
5.60
5.30
3.78
3.13
2.46
5 yxL# I #150 .45
.61
ayo#,
%o?ird f o r h ire d h e lp
.16
.38
•41
.34
.20
4 .(3
5 y r . 1.79
ve.
P la in s
1928 2.17
1929 1.97
1950 1.44
1931 1.06
1932
.86
Table XI afcows a m rked doore .se In lab o r c o s t.
Vammsrt th io de-
ereaae Io psraetlcyilly a l l a tta in e d by reducing the amount paid to labor
r .th er th an reducing th e nan months o f la b o r.
nd doprooiutlon a r
he ltcsss o f Ic iees, ta ro s
Xargoly fixed charges wdilofi, during t h is sxirlod, r e ­
mained nc srly th e same.
The T ot th a t th e amount "paid* f o r le a se s and
tax es ohom some docro seo e n l irgely be a ttrib u te d to t e fa c t th a t In sane
oases t axes m r e o llc w d to go delinquent and leu sod lands vmro used and
no Im so payment r. d e.
C tW r roduotioRD which viwo nude in ouoh Items o f expense a s auto
and tru o k in .', ranch su p p lies and expense, in d lc to th e f c t th a t noeenslty
demanded reductions and those Itee o lend th o rm lv o s to such tem porarily
thrcngh postponed upkeep and replioesiont c o s ts th ic h E tern ally mould have
-5 0 -
been tak en m re o f .
iecreaeed co ats in feed and s a l t ire due to the f a c t
th a t th e sheep so re kept on th e range lo n e r , fed le s s c o n c e n tra te s, and
were not kept In a s high a degree of f la s h .
Sore of th ese reductions In
c o s ts , e s p e c ia lly in feed, appear to go f a rth e r than d e sirab le in securing
th e most tiCOBCBlo re la tio n s h ip between c o s ts and re tu rn s .
This la shown
p a r tic u la r ly in decreased lamb c ro p s, decreased weight in la r b s , and in ­
creased death lo s s .
The v a ria tio n in d iffe re n t c o st items in th e tito a re as in d ic a te s a
d ifferen ce in methods o f operation followed a s w ell a s in c e rta in land use
p ra c tic e s .
In the ln te m o u n ta in re g io n , i t i s observed th a t such items a s
la b o r, feed , auto end tru c k in g , ranch su p p lie s, and d ep re cia tio n a re higher
than in the p la in s re g io n .
This b ears out th e fa c t th a t th e re i s more x?ictcr
feeding tnd shed Iar M ng in th is area arhich re q u ire m r e la b o r, hauling o f
feed and su p p lie s , increased need fo r su p p lies bee iuse o f th e above, and
heavier Investment in equipment and various Items o f machinery f a r hay pro­
duction and feeding use,
Tax c o sts fo r th e two areas a re f a i r l y comparable, b u t the s lig h tly
hig h er charge in the I n teraountain region la a ttrib u te d to semewhat g re a te r
percentage o f owned land md higher v alu e o f iHprovm'cnta and equipment.
Lease c o sts nor head a re higher in th e p la in s regions duo to proportio m to ly higher louaed ninge c o st a s JslSed upon carrying c ip o e lty due to
cor:.B tltio n with dry land farming In th e a re a , a s w ell a s h ig h er per cent
o f range land le a se d .
t
-5 1
—
I.?wwtw vi e
assets:
Land
B ulldin ;a and improvonants
Machinery and equipment
boric stock
T otal fixed
T o tal Assets*
L ia b il i t ie s ;
Sheep
Land
T o ta l
UX
Avi y*x /
Intim m untain
P la ia e
$11.77
2.00
1.02
.29
"$14.99
m .o s
2.14
.90
.17
15.23
25.75
26.28
4.36
4,30
v8.G8
3.55
2.78
&6.33
^Includes vnlue o f shesp and feed on hanfl os o f Jnjtm ry I .
The f I iV^ires shown In Table XH s' ould not be considered a s a c tu a l
amounts to b e used a s th e b a s is in considerin,’ average investm ent.
based upon in f la tio n a r y , 1988, v -lu es fo r both a re a s.
They are
They do, however,
show th e r e la tiv e d is trib u tio n o f investm ent in the two a re a s.
Slzo of U nits
The s iz e o f u n its v a rie s considerably w ithin the two a ren a, sheep
numbers varying from 1,000 head upward (Table X III).
On some rinoliee which
have range c a t t l e in a d d itio n to th e sheep e n te r p r is e , th e number o f c a ttle
run w ill vary from 50 to 350 head or more#
Tablo X III. ivcrarte Ranch Orr nl" tlc n (bG)
I nterrKiURtain
Lumber o f sheep run
wires range owned
«.cres n n g e leased
Tons o f bay produced
Tons o f straw produced
luelzols o f ,grain produced
6,700
9,094
7,119
1,122
26
918
_
P lains
2,670
3,962
10,755
228
30
1,211
-5 2 -
Tfce averttge nurber o f sheep run by ronehea during the period studied
shorn doe I Jed Iy la rg e r mesbora run In western Montana.
This no doubt Ie
duo, in sor e degree, to dry years and heavy liq u id a tio n In tfco p lain s a re a ,
ae w ell as to th e sm all sample taken.
Considerably higher percentages o f owned to leased land in the ln to r S u u n td n area Influonee very m a te ria lly the s ta b iliz a tio n o f operations In
th a t o p t io n .
Tl Ic Ie borne out In
o f th e study in th e two areas (3 0 ).
verage sheep numbers fo r th e fiv e years
Table XIV shows th e average number o f
sheep rur. In th e two a reas In 1920.
o . o f sues
Table CIV, 31ae of Xarohoa by regions In 1928 (BO)*
%
Hariber o f Ranenwi
: In te rm u iita in
:
P lains
no, o f bands
1,000 - 1,500
1,600 - 3,000
3,100 - 4,500
4,600 - 6,000
6,100 - 7,500
Over 7,500
I
2
3
4
5
Gt
Toteil
*Taken from b u lle tin Indleate d .
10
B
8
6
9
2
9
7
9
S
5
5
40
40
The fle e c e weights o f the sheep In th e two areas a re approxim ately
th e eoae (Table XV) and in d ic a te a predominance o f fine-w ool breeding in the
ewe bands o f both reg io n s.
Table XV, Average of Factors f f noting Incorn
_______ fo r the 1926-193/ or led ( 0)
___ _
S
I
I > death lo s s J t laflfe crop $ LaEfe .IQlqht t KLeeee weight
Intensountaln
7.25
84.19
74.81
10.03
P la in s
6.50
76.00
65.00
10.10
-50
Table XT In d ica te s tliO ta e r eased ORpfeasie placed upcs I'-jefc produc­
tio n In th e lntcareountaln a re a , both In p er cent Ianb crop mx3 In w ig h t
o f I v b s aa has boor, rantlonod yevloiisly In tills the a le .
TobJto XTI showa th r v a ria tio n s between th e ln te m o en to in and p la in s
regions In c e rta in o p o n tto n p ra c tic e s .
Table 271, vromge of PYictora in Operation Costa
: Pounds o f
: hay fed
In to rra o u rtln
365
Plfilno
193
:
s
Iio. o f il ivo bn $ Ho. head run
w inter food
i per m n
ISO
06&
400
4B5&
-
Tear
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
54-
Table XTXZf P rioes Paid to Xiunfters fo r Lari) and i o o l and
IisSex o f Laab and >ool P rioes Coefclzied In Montana
1910-1936 ( m )
x E ricee paid to farmers for
$
Index of lamb
%Lambs per owt. t lo o l per zionnd:
and m o l 'irlceo
:
$
I
(1910-14 = 100}
Dollars
lo o ts
18.0
98.0
5.50
94.3
5.38
17.0
102.3
18.9
5.70
17.5
99.1
5.77
18.0
106.4
6.41
1915
1916
1917
191B
1919
6.88
8.07
12.25
13.87
12.64
24.9
29.6
48.4
57.8
50.0
128.8
152*1
240.1
379.7
266.9
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
11.62
6*68
9.52
10.20
10.18
41.8
1S.0
33.5
38.8
39.3
316.9
110.9
175.8
196.0
197.1
1925
1926
1927
1928
1639
11.85
11.25
10.87
11.23
11.27
40.8
25.0
32.8
37.8
32.8
216.4
195.6
186.4
202.8
190.1
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
7.48
5.10
3.86
4.54
5.38
23.5
15.2
10.3
18.8
23.5
128.1
87.0
62.6
91.2
111.3
1935
1936
6.47
7.42
19.5
26.4
110.8
137.7
55-
I^Tt IT
amauirg ARD cohxium otjs
Cu th e b s i s o f th e dato proocntod in t h i s t h e s is , i t eon be a t , ted
th a t the fa c to rs a ffe c tin g th e economic w elfare o f ranching in Montana rank
in importance in th e follow ing o rd er.
I.
The success or f a ilu r e o f UonUnm ranches i s f i r s t of a l l de­
pendent u on an a p p ra isa l o f physical fn o to ra and th e ad ap tatio n o f the u n it
to them .
Ko se t ru lo i s c pH cable to th e s t a t e , o r even to th e e n a lle r ,
mom lo cu liaed a re as due to the wide v a ria tio n in such fa c to rs os topography
s o i l , c lim ate, duratio n o f snow cover, e tc .
These should be studied and
t h e i r a n a ly sis determine th e type and e x te n t o? form or ranch operations to
be p rac tic ed upon each in d iv id u al u n it.
Land charge and valu es should be
based on probable long-tim e p ro d u ctiv ity and p ric e s .
H isto ry ah'ws the need fo r
!aiming a d e fin ite
.ro.gr-Jn fo r th e u n i t,
based upon a d a p ta b ility to i t s surroundings, then follow ing t h i s program
t! rough.
W ntana as a s ta te i s in a d ry , not a w et, area as i s o ften in ­
d icated by referen ce to "normal" y e ars.
As proof o f th is we have forage
development and s o i l p ro file s which could have been b u i lt up only under semi
r i d c o n d itio n s.
This nocoaoitatea oonu@rv.tlvo stocking o f our rin g s
lrinde a t a l l tim es and the build in g up o f feed reserves f o r unusually dry
proving seasons or w in ters o f more than usual se v e rity .
A p lu s of operations should be followed which w ill make ftor more
c o rp la te year round u t i l i s a t i o n o f la b o r, and a minimum o f temporary or
sir.sonal o rployment.
.speculative a c tiv ity has no place in a sound program of o p e ra tio n s.
I t upaets the o rg an izatio n o f th e p la n t, causes mlouse o f reso u rce s, and
Io o ften f a t a l to tho fin a n c ia l urogram o f th e o e d ito rs
H ils Is borne
out by tho p a st experiences o f th e dry land farmer and h is f u t i l e a t t a r t o ,
over a period o f y e a rs , to c u ltiv a te a re as which were fundamentally su ite d
to grazing only.
Dry land f a m ln :
tem porarily su cce ssfu l in years o f
unusually high m oisture and p ric e c o n d itio n s, but in th e long ru n , l e f t the
o p erato r hopelessly Involved fin a n c ia lly and many acres o f grazing land
w asted.
The dry land farmer was not the only one g u ilty o f sp ecu lativ e
p m c tio o a .
i'-any c a t t l e and sheep ranchers have. In th e p a s t, increased
t h e i r herds and flo ck s during periods o f r is in g p rice s and been forced to
liq u id a te due to pressure of re so u rce s, or c re d ito r s , a t
r i c e s ruinous to
t h e i r e n te rp ris e .
2.
The management aid a b i l i t y of th e o perator is probably the most
im portant fa c to r in success o r f a i l u r e once th e p la n t i s organized In har­
mony with i t s surroundings,
i s n a il l n c r o e e in u n it
ro d u c tio n , l . e . , c a lf
o r lamb c ro p , to n s or bushels e r a ero , e t c . , o ften m i s s the d ifferen ce be­
tween th e paying o f annual expenses o f o p e ra tio n , plus a f a i r p r o f it, or o f
going behind fin a n c ia lly .
Once a ranch i s estab lish ed In harmony w ith i t s
surroundings, th e production fa c to r i s la rg e ly do ondent upon th e mnag«>I a l a b il i ty of th e o p e ra to r.
I t Is necessary fo r him to do everything
eo o n cn iailly fe a s ib le to lncrenae, not only h is t o t a l o u tp u t, but a lso th e
q u a lity o f th e commodity produced.
There a re c e rta in fix ed chargee and
overhead c o sts to bo met re g a rd le ss o f tho crop produced, and th e fewer the
u n its o f s a la b le goods, or th e poorer th o ir q u a lity , tho hig h er 411 be
-57-
th e lr p ro o o rtlo n d share of th ese exneRSes.
The SEile o f produce alone m y determ ine whether o r not t i e y e a r's
o p eratio n s w ill be su c c e ssfu l.
power o f the ln d lrld u a l
The t i r e to s e l l , and o fte n th e bargaining
nd h is a b i l i t y to o b tain n d r-ntagoous 'rlo ea fo r
M s commodity, m y be th e deciding fa c to r .
3.
Keeping a complete and accurate s e t o f records and planning a
d e f in ite budget of expenses and Inocme i s foreign to r/my farm and ranch
e o r a to r s .
Farming Io a b u sin e ss. In Bisny cases a business o f considerable
magnitude, and no business can hope to be su cce ssfu l fo r Ion,* unless a sys­
tem atic plan o f f Ina- cIn * i s Inaugurated.
I f the c o st o f d iffe re n t operations and th e re tu rn s from them are
k n o w , i t m y w ell be p o ssib le to make c e r ta in adjustm ents Hhlch vrf.ll In croaee th e fin a n c ia l re tu rn s o f th e o p e ra to r.
4.
Death lo ss In llre s to c k must be held a t a minimum. Pila f a c to r
alone mgr play an Im portant p a rt In detorm lnln: the fin a n c ia l success or
f a ilu r e o f th e y e a r 's o p e ra tio n s.
Losses must be held to a ml BiW i i f suo-
os0:5 Is to be a n tic ip a te d since tho r e s u l ts o f th e y e a r's operation m y d eend u on t h is f LiCtor alo n e.
The eov/ and th e ewe a re c rrio d through th e
y ear fo r the c a lf , tho Im b and th e vool Which th ey , re s p e c tl r c l y , «111
produce and the Iocs o f e ith e r th e c a l f o r lamb «111 mean t o t I lo ss o f a l l
monies expended f o r carry in g th e breeding animal fo r a y e a r.
In case tho
n atu re animal d ie s , th o o rig in a l lm rastront Is lo s t In a d d itio n to the
annual carry in g charge.
I t Is nosslble to lnsura supplementary feed crops
a g a in st tho so -c a lle d "a c ts o f God* nd once th- crop i s in s ig h t, I t mould
seem a wise business p o licy to p rotect the lm m stm nt ra th e r
than to go
-ES-
ahead in a haphazard m n n e r, stak in g STer^fthing on ehanoe and tr u s tin g to
"luok".
5*
P rle se a re o ften
o f the a g ric u ltu ra l group.
iro n e n tir e b la ra fo r th e fin a n c ia l condition
Prloea a re I m o r ta n t, but th e w rite r has placed
t i l s f iCtor l a s t In tlie group in d o tsm in ln g th e suecess or f a ilu r e o f a g ri­
c u ltu r a l o p e ra tio n s, la rg e ly because i t i s le s s su b ject to th e c o n tro l o f
th e o o r a to r •
P ric e , ao re fe rre d to h ere. In d ica te s the general p rice le v e l o f
a g ric u ltu ra l ooranodltiee and does not r e f e r to the selling; price received
by th e in d iv id u a l op erato r who m y be more o r lo ss o f an c >portunist.
Some
men m y c o n s is te n tly receive unusually rood p ric e s and appear to have the
Ingenious a b i l i t y required to s e l l a t th e one p a rtic u la r t i r o each year
when p ric e s a m th e h ig h e s t.
The exception i s the liv e sto c k producer and/or
feeder who m y f a tte n M s liv e sto c k to a high degree o f f in is h one y e a r, may
not f a tte n a t a l l th e n e x t, or may put th e stock on a fa tte n in g ra tio n and
s e l l a t any tin e during th e feeding e r io d ; th e m n who appears to have
"in sid e" in fo rm tio n which enables him to s e l l a t Ju st t ® r ig h t time to
receiv e th e h ig h est p r o f it fo r h is ocmmcdlty,
Eoet p ro d u c e s a re not so
fo rtu n a te end, while a la rg e share o f them t r y to take advantage o f unusUfilly pood p rice s i t u i t i o n s , may lose money by try in g to m anipulate th e ir
s a le s so a s to re c e iv e more advantageous p r lw e .
In most o s o s , as f a r a s
the In d iv id u a l is concerned, b e tte r r e s u lts would be obtained over a period
o f years by s e llin g h is produce when i t i s ready to go to m arket.
Hven
tho gh tho p rice nay in crease to some e x te n t, th e added weight of the feeder
animal m y cause i t to drop to a lower grade i f i t is held fo r higher p ric e s
n f te r I t has reached s a tis f a c to r y f in is h .
The cost of feed and the addi­
tio n a l expense Involrod w ill be another item which w ill a^piln decrease th e
n t io i -',ted Bi.rgin c f p ro fit*
Jh ile a l l
f t h i s m y come under th e heading of " p ric e ” , i t seems
to th e w rite r to come more pro e r ly under th e be d o f "mnageiMnt" a s l i s t e d
under
a r t 2 o f th is cu nary.
P rloe and s e l li n g , Troci th is point of view,
mlg t c i s l l y become th e determ ining fa c to r In th e success or A llu r e o f th e
o erutlnf? u n i t,
iow erer, from th e standpoint o f fa c to rs c o n trib u tin g to the
success o r f a ilu r e o f lonttm a ran ch es, p rice here re fe rs to general p rice
le v e l o f a g ric u ltu ra l oroduce.
Probably th e most Io Io a l method fo r the a g r ic u ltu r a l producers to
in crease t r e i r g en eral p rice le v e l i s through system atic Emrtoting o f pro­
d u c ts, Imjjroved system o f g rid in g and stan d ard izin g t h e i r produst, and by
improving th e
u a lity o f the goods marketed ( I ) .
In th e case of c e rta in
ccrm odltles p a rtic u la rly t h i s c m , no doubt, be most s a t is f a c to r i l y effe cte d
by cooperation on the p a rt o f th e producer.
o o l, f o r example, might be
ruded so th a t each Indlvidtm l would receiv e payment based u on the m erits
c f h is c li p in stea d o f tak in g the "going p rice ".
Grading o f such a commodity
i s a hig h ly tecim lo al job and req u ire s the se rv ic e s of a s p e c ia lis t who
coi ld be brought in by a cooperative group whereas th e c o st would be prohib­
i ti v e to an In d iv id u a l.
would
I t i s tru e th a t th e producer o f an In fe rio r product
r e f e r to receiv e payment bused on the average qu I i t y of goods pro­
duced in h is neighborhood, but payment bused on a c tu a l m erit o f th e good i s
only Ju st
nd would tend to improve u a lity in the farmer**
roduce.
The fe d e ra l farm programs e re endeavoring t o draw th e a g ra rian pop-
- 60—
u ln tlc n t-r iTWther In to one group which w ill organize t h e i r prograne, not only
in ’■sri'ony with e?ieh o th e r, but a lso In homony with b e s t I iM use Vtnetloos*
Vhlle th e government I fa m programs have met w ith considerable op­
p o sitio n and o ritlo la m , they have gone f a r along th e road tovmrd Improving
p ra e tio e s o f land use tod conservation o f reso u rces.
They have done more
towird bringing to g e th e r and organizing th e farming c la s s th an anything
heretofore#
The production and c o n tro l programs inaugurated w i l l, under very
complete coo o ra tio n cn the p a rt o f th e producers, do much to elim inate I ig e
surpluseo and thereby tend to r a is e th e g en eral p rice le v e l on farm oorm ditle s #
I t appears to th e w rite r th a t th e fa c to rs c o n trib u tin g to th e success
o r f a ilu r e o f Kontsne r nohos rank in importance in t o o rd er named.
How­
e v e r, s a tis f a c to ry r e s u l t s with regard to any one, o r even I t ! several o f
the f a c to r s , nny e a s ily be overbalanced to such an ex ten t as to give a
negative value i f even one o f the othor fa c to rs i s neglected to such an ex­
te n t t h a t exce tio n a lly poor r e s u lts in regard to i t a re fo rt! araalng#
“ 61**
author I s Indebted t o Dr. R. T. Clark and Dr. R. R. Renne
fo r t h e ir T ilm b le su-^geetlona and c r it ic is m s o f t h i s t h e s i s .
Kr. E. R.
McCall and o th er s t a f f members h iv e g iv en a d v ice and su g g e stio n s inhlch
m re o f nuch a s s is ta n c e .
LITBKAKfoE CITED
(1)
Baker, A. L.
1338. COiPftRISOB CF ALFALFA AHD 'UKSKiJiH HFkXTGBASS .AYS FOR RIBTERi m YIAjRLIBG UEIFmS IB THE BORmBI GREAT HLAIBS AHD THEIS
m v a s m * on SDLE.:Kj« GAH?S. U. S. Dept. A jr. Teoh. '!ul. Ho.
C55, 8 pp«
(2)
Iao , I-.
Baker, A. L«, C lark, V. I . , Bathowo, 0» R.
1937. EFFECT CF DIFrSHEHT SHKiODS CF GRAZING CM M TIVE VSGETATIOf
AHD GAIHS OF STH RS IH BOi TIIERB GREAT PLAIBB. U. S. Dept. A<:p*.
Teoh. Bui. Ho. 547, 13 pp.
(3)
B lack, w. i t . , C lark , V. I .
1930. EFFECT OF SUPFLEREHTIRC AIHTKR ABD SUL- ER . AH/E CS GAIBS CF
STEMS IH THE HCRTHEHH GREAT PLAIHS. U. Se Dept. Agr. Tech.
Bui. Ho. 620, 16 p p ., I l l u e .
(4 )
Co o je r , J . is.
1983.
KAV-T SHEEP HIODUCTICH.
1710, 34 p p ., I I l u s .
U. S. Dept. A r . Fnrmers1 U l. Bo.
(5)
Crad look, George W., Pearso, C. Kenneth
1930. SUB BE RUH-OFF AHD EROSION OB GRANITIC MOUBTAIB SOILS QF
IDAHO AS IBFLUEBCED BY RAHGE COVER, SOIL DISTURBANCE, SLOPE,
Aim F CinTATIOB IR V-VBiITY. U. S. Dept. A r . G iro. Ho. 482,
24 p p ., i l l u s .
(6)
Craddock, G. W., F o rslin g , C. L.
1938. THE INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE ABD GRAZIHG Oil SiRIHO-FALL SHEEP
IR - TjlHRN IDAHO. U. S. D e jt. Agr. Toci-. I u l . Ho. 6J0,
43 p p ., i l l u s .
(7)
E ck ert, P. S ., Slagsvold, P. L.
1938. HOUTB.NA CATTIi-; SiIII3MEIIT Sources, D estin atio n s, and Clmraoter
of : Itnna1S C a ttle .MpBiMits. Mont. Agr. Hxpt. Sta. Ful.
Ho. 358, 44 p p ., i l l u s .
(O)
(9)
Henry. Ernest E.
,1938. SECRETARY'S HAflDDOCK FOR THO-QAY CGtiFKRKHCE CS T
I
v VDIT SYSTEM. 162 p . Used a t Boteman iroduotion C redit
Aes’n Meeting f o r Enployoue and Inspectors of the A ssociations,
held a t Bozomn, Hcmt., Sopt. 8 -0 , 1338, 162 pp. 9
H itchcock, A. A.
1935. Ui-NUAL OF GRASSES OB THE TOUTED STATES.
O ffice , -osli., D. C ., 1040 p p ., i l l u s .
U. S. Govt. Rrinting
(9 a)
Iiult*, IYed S ., K .S ., HuD.
1330. RMIOS BEBP B (K)UCTIOE in The Seventecm I eetem States.
Joiin VIlley * Sons, In o ., New York, and Chapian and H all,
L td ., London, 806 pp., i l l u s .
(j.0)
u l t s , Yed S ., !,3.C., Hie / ., an I H ill, John A ., '.So.
1931. PJiBGH STSEP ARD WOOL in The Seventeen ,,ectem S tates.
John Wiley & Sons, I n e ., Bew York, and Ciiapnan and lia ll,
L td ., London, 374 pp ., i l l u s .
(11)
Johnson, B eil S ., Saunderson, 14. H.
1936. TYKS Oi AJddHO IK MOKTMJV - Pt. I , Hiysioal Environment
end Voononio Enotors A ffeotinc Montana Agriculture. Mont.
Agr. Expt. S ta. Bui. Ho. 320, 79 p p ., i l l u s .
(12)
Land U tiliz a tio n Program, Bureau of Agrioultural KoonordLes, U. S.
Dept. Agr.
1939. THE USD UTIUZATIUii PROGRAMFCR THE BOfcTiMtB GREAT PUIBS
Iiortiiern Great Plains Region, Headquarters, Lincoln, Iieb.,
15 pp. i l l u s .
(13)
McCarty, EdHercI C .,
1936. TIE RELATIQH OP GRC -TH TO THE VARYIBG CA EOEYDRATE CCITEBT
III HCUHTAIH IiROiE. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Pul. Bo. 598,
24 pp ., i l l u s .
(14)
Mercer, Ralph D.
1938.
.TED WHEATORASS I* MONTANA. Mont. Apr. Expt. S ta. Giro.
Ho. 92, 12 p p ., I l l u s .
(15)
Price, Raymond
1938. ARTIFICIAL RESEEDING OK OAK-J RUSH RABGS IH CENTi AL UTAH.
U. S. Dept. Agr. Giro. Ho. 458, 19 pp., i l l u s .
(16)
Hereto, Roland R.
1936. READJUSTING MONTANA’ S AGRICULTURE, VIII. Tax Delinquencies
and Mortgage F oreclosures. Mont. Agr. .:p t. S ta . Rul. Ho.
319, 27 p p ., i l l u s .
(17)
Iienne, Roland R.
1936. MOBTkHA L' ND WBKdSHIP An Analysis of the Omtorahip Battem
and I ts Significance in Land Use Plandni,. I ant. Agr• Fjti*
S ta . Bui. Ho. 322, 56 pp ., i l l u s .
(18)
Rmrne, Roland R.
1933. MOSfAIiA FARM BANKRUPTCIES A Study of the Humber, Charactorl s t i o e , end Causes of Fam Bazikruptoies Over a Forty-Year
IiOriod w itli Sons Suggestions fo r Preventing Hiem in the
;liture. IRmt. Agr« Kxpt. s ta . Bui. Ho. SCO, 53 pp., I llu s .
(1 9 )
Be; r a ,
B.
1939. I K m m . F ' F TO -OmSUFgS Mutiber, O M r a o t e r l a tic o , aofl
Oat oos o f B irr Liortgag* T ta^ o lo o u ro s Over a S e w n ty -T e o r
P e r io d , % lth Bone
Iona f o r Boduolnfi Thsse in th e
: F 'tu ro . iKMlte 3T . IiEpt. t . 3 u l . KOe 3 6 6 , 56 p p ., IllUOe
(20)
.xturideraon , M. H ., V lnko , Loulo
1935. Tfm BOCmOC3 OF HAllGi StZSP PRODOCTI.« IB HQBT'tBA.
F o n t. s r . P tpt. S ta . I u l . B o. 3 0 5 , 55 p p . , U l u s .
(21)
S aunderson, S . FI»
1936. HfADJi
’
LTOBE V. I e c u m ie Changes In
K-. !ste m ’ s Tvsttse L iv e s to c k T o d u e tio ? . F o n t. .fir. B tp t. 3 t a .
B u i. B o. a i l , 30 p p . , I I l u a .
(r:J)
Jam td ereo n , M. R .
1936. A STVBT CF TH 'T - -JtSS CF KCJWiA LXtmDOC H B e S IS , PRRgES
L D I-rB fIT S . MMIt. ,or# a c p t . J t a . J t i l . Mo. 3 2 9 , 20 p p . ,
U lu s .
( 3)
tx tu rd o rso n , K. F . , C h itte n d e n , D. %.
1937. CATTLE RAMCt IHO 33T ZSDITT RA An A m ljS ta o f C p em tln fi iia tiio d a,
C o eta , a td Bettam e I n F e e te r n , C e n tr a l end B n a te ra A reas
o f t .o -A t o . Tv.nt* r * Expt» ^t& . B u i. O. ..A l, 32 PP*,
U lu s .
(S4)
SfiWfio, 9 . A*
1935. KrrBUDS CF RSRSTABLISFIim SOFFALC SBAflB CU CULTIV vTSD U JD
BI Vf "Ffi AT ’ .BTI. 0 . S . a p t . , - r . G ir o . TO. 328, CO p > .
H its.
(25)
Savage, D. A.
1937.
(26)
IHGOO;
Sorrm-T'7 oh:-, it H A m , 1935.
P o . 5 4 9 , 56 p p . , I U u o .
0 . F.. De t .
fir. T a tii. B u i.
SewgB, D. A.
'
OCTTfiTTr O vfi *-D:II3.
56 p p . , l l l u a .
(2 7 )
L-. 3. D ept.
f ir . C ir o . Ho. 4 91,
D m pp, 03000 . , I . 3.
1930. (Fev.) BfiEF CATTLB T h e tr F eedlcg and M n n g a m n t in
C orn B o lt f it a te a . Jtihn I l a y A, Dons, I n c . , Be* Y ork,
Ghnpmn Si B a l l , L t d . , London, 494 p p . , U l u s .
-6 5 -
(38)
S lagsvold, pm L1
1936. mjmxmm
osotmsea.
(39)
smxemjsmn tu
K ent.
sajutma** irric^ tion
- r . Sxpt. 3 t a . Uul1 : o . 315, 18 pp., JLllus1
I n s e to M , P . L 1
1937.
AK Ar;023X3 OF MTWJJA IfcSK MOOES. ISont1 / y . Bspt. rite. S o l.
P o. 345, 78 pp.
(3 0 )
J tc r o h , S1 A.
19/3.
(31)
r?'. " a p t.
to r c h , .1. A.
1936.
(32)
,j c r a i : . /
LCTi'L*..: T'/,:' ^
J t a . J u l. r«* 295, 70 p p ., I U ub1
PEARJtrrim K<a.7--JIA»S GSlIOULm3 VH1 Montana's Dry-Land
-rlc u ltu re . Mont1 vgr. Dxpt, S t a . Itul1 Po. 318, 19 p p .,
Illu s 1
D ootoll, R1 B1
1937.
BAKCK CGKSHmiXCB AKD F- JSf CR DTT1 Paper presented ostorn
S ta te s S r te n s le e ConTorenoo, Jpoteme,
Qh1, ISsgr 2 5 , 1937,
9 pp.
(33)
T o o t o ll, R. 3 .
1937. \ DIBCUMK n CF THE P m i RSSR J ld !, TKPd i m , JPD ?2CTD:.iICK
IN B m m D H TD F JSf CREDIT. Hoderul Land Bank o f Spokane,
T .o h ., 3 pp .
(34)
Tootell, R. B.
1938. THS IKTSREtT OF TRS F T O I I- ND BAKE IM Ti . BESTS®? RASto
IrIOBLEB1 Iiiper P resented t o th e Forthssost S c i e n t i f i c a s s'n
a t Jpok n o , Ooh1 , Deo. 2 9 , 1938. Federal Land Bank o f
Spokm e, a s h ., 12 pp.
(33)
U nited S ta te o Foreot Hortrlee
1937. BAKdE EL'J'T B JZGQCK. U1 J1 D ept, ,g r . , U1 I1 G ovt. J r ln tln c
O f f ic e ,
s h . , D1 C ., 1046 p p ., I l l u s 1
(36)
e v o r , Jolm S1 , C lerenlm , Frodorlc E.
1936. PLKT IDGLOGr1 LcOmw-RlH Book C o ., In c1 , Mew Voik
London, 601 p p ., l l l u s .
(37)
nd
e sto v e r, M. L .,
r v l s , J 1 T . , JSBtmitr9 Leroy, Porgzm , Ceorge «,
ThyoeH , John C ., 3 e H , M. •
IL LL1 J - .
'HF 33 AS OTPfcHEI
T I
.
H
m m s a R A s a , and cthsr hat abb p
GD'AT PLAITS. U . S . Dept,
36 p p ., IHttQ1
.atm® encps
for tip
jpr. Tech. D ul. ”o . 307,
ntemaei
(38)
Unpublished Bata o f th e Dept*
Boon.
IrO ntm i S ta te SoJLlese, Hoaamans liont.
Other L lto ra tu ro Used But hot Cited
1,
AGRieamRM sr n a n c s
19,50* I *.>*0 * *s t:* d* Jovt• P rin tin g O ffic e s ash* s D* C* 544 Tip*2
2,
FKKBS HO FEEDING, A Handbook fo r the Student and Stooknon* F. B.
Morrison
1933. Twentieth Ts1-1I t lo n , Unabridged, The F n rrlson ubllshlrv: C o.,
I Theca, n. y . , 1050 pp., U lu s ,
M
OM
TAM
Astateuniversitylibraries
3 1762 1 0 0 15106 5
62758
N 378
N 98f
oofi^-8------------ -----------------------N ye , J.Q -.
Pm ntn rg n n n t.r l h l l t l n g , toth e s u c c e ss o r f a i l u r e o f
W rtTl t.A T t A
DATE
—
N 378
IN 9 8 f ,
cop. 2
A l l A fi
-----------------------------
IS S U E D TO
-
62728