UC BERKELEY MASTER NEGATIVE STORAGE NUMBER 99-156.4 (National version of master negative storage number: CU SN99156.4) MICROFILMED 1999 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICE USAIN State and Local Literature Preservation Project Funded in part by the National Endowment for the Humanities REPRODUCTION AVAILABLE THROUGH INTERLIBRARY LOAN OFFICE MAIN LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY, CA 94720-6000 COPYRIGHT The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials including foreign works under certain conditions. In addition, the United States extends protection to foreign works by means of various international conventions, bilateral agreements, and proclamations. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use." that user may be liable for copyright infringement. University of California at Berkeley reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. Miller, William Byron Sheep production on the California National Forest Berkeley] [1925] BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD TARGET University of California at Berkeley Library USAIN State and Local Literature Preservation Project Master negative storage number: 99-156.4 (national version of master negative storage number: CU SN99156.4) FORMAT: BK LEVEL: r ISBN: GLADIS#: 117649631E LANG: eng CNTRY: cau LCCN: MOD: 990614/MO ME: Miller, William Byron. Tl: Sheep production on the California National Forest IM: [Berkeley, University of California, College of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Station, 1925] CO: 39, (i.e. 43), 2-7, 41-76 numb. |. incl. mounted photos., tables, diagrs. (part fold.) forms. 28 cm CALL: 308t.M652 Microfilmed by University of California Library Photographic Service, Berkeley, CA LIST OF IRREGULARITIES, MAJOR DEFECTS AND MISSING MATERIAL Skips p. XLV FILMED AND PROCESSED BY LIBRARY PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, 94720 DATE 10/99 REDUCTION RATIO: 10 FILMED AND PROCESSED BY LIBRARY PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, 94720 DATE 10/99 REDUCTION RATIO: 10 &o, ¢ Ys 3 < A &.° a PM-1 3'%2"x4” PHOTOGRAPHIC MICROCOPY TARGET NBS 1010a ANSI/ISO #2 EQUIVALENT Il 10 =e 2 32 La li22 I 22 e 15 = : Ki | = ha [J20 E ° eo I kk l= ll 1 Na DY “Ha Ca Sheep production on the California national forest By William Byron Miller B. 8.1922 THESIS Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Forestry in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ® 0 P00000000000000 000 AAS Approved A. o> Committee in Charge Deposited in the University Library (ery FI, (FEST : 7 Date & Librarian Semelretiyy SHEEP PRODUCTION ON THE CALIFORNIA NATIONAL FOREST SHEEP PRODUCTION ON THE CALIFORNIA NATIONAL FOREST Table of Contents Introduction i SE Methods of Procedure A. Basic Plan ¢ o» B. Scope of Inquiry and Procedure Factors Influencing Investigation . . . . . . . . A, California National Forest - Summer Range BE. Foothill lands. Winter Range . Cui MAPROL + is oo os uisiein iy Results of Investigations . . . . . . . . A. Presentation of results of dats P. Discussion of results C. Comparison of results Conclusions « + « « +. Acknowledgement . . . . Appendix Letters . . . Questionnaire « . +. . . . Methods of Compilation . Illustrations . Table of Contents -2- Graphs. Following pages 9, 20, 22, 23 Tables SHEEP PRODUCTION ON THE CALIFORNIA NATIONAL FOREST INTRODUCTION A special meeting of the Northern California Wool Growers Assoclation was held at Corning in 1923. At the assembly a Forest Grazing Committee was appointed to vosperate with the U. 8. Forest Service in matters re- lating to sheep grazing on the California National Forest. Although this Forest affords good feed, many areas are below grazing capacity chiefly because of dry seasons and overstocking. Due to this condition reduction in numbers of stock or a shortened grazing season will be necessary before the forage may be restored. The sheepmen must adopt in their operations one or more of the following conditions: (1) Marked reduction in number of sheep grazed. (2) Raising lambs ready for spring market in order to de- crease the consumption of forage by growing animals. (3) Adjustment of grazing season to meet successfully the menace from mechanically injurious plants like certain _ ee rotor ese foxtail grasses. At the request of Mr. W, P. Wing, Secretary of the California Wool Growers Association, the Division of Fores- try, through its organization of Range Management of the University of California, initiated a project for a study of factors involved in production of sheep on the California National Forest. The chief aim was to investigate and re port the findings on the following points: 1. Utilization of forested and other range lands for productive raising of sheep. 2. Comparative cost of sheep production in relation to methods of handling. 3. Market values (quality) of and profits from sheep reared under different conditions and methods of handling. Many phases make this project desirable. The range studied is typical of other summer grazing grounds in northern California; many problems with which sheep growers cn the California Forest are confronted are com- mon to other ranges; an increased number of sheep in fut- ure will make the solution of the points here outlined of great importance. The data which forme the background in this in- vestigation have been secured by: l. Personal inspection of sheep ranges (a) on the California National Forest, and (b) on foothill renges ad- jacent to the Forest. 2+ Personal interviews with (a) woolgrowers, (b) ranchers, (c) Forest Service officials, and (d) County Agents. 3+ Questionnaire sent to many sheepmen. 4. Consultation and correspondence with (a) members of the California Wool Growers Association; (b) members of the United States Depar tment of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Industry; (c) extension workers in Range Management in other states; and (d) County Assessors. S¢ Use of data and various information from the U. S. Forest Service, Livestock Associations, and numerous statistics. 8. Analvsis of mich published material. I. METHODS OF PROCEDURE A. Basic Plan Plans of procedure were drawn up following con- ferences with Dr. A. W, Sampson, Associate Professor in Range Management, Division of Forestry, University of Cal- ifornia; Mr. W. P., Wing, Secretary of the California Wool Growers Association; and mr. J. W. Nelson, Assistant Dis- trict Forester, U. 8S. Forest Service, in charge of graz- ing. 1t was decided to obtain all data possible by field studies with cooperative assistance by members of the U. S. Forest Service, Livestock Associations, and stock- men. E. Scope of Inquiry and Procedure l. Preparation of Questionnaire. « A ques- tionnaire designed to summarize all phases of sheep raising problems in northern California was prepared. A list of all sheep owners in counties partly included in or adjoining the California Forest was secured. The questionnaire was sent October 27, 1924, to 418 owners located nearest the Forest with a letter from Mr. Wing urging them to furnish the desired information. On Nov ember 26, 1924, a follow-up letter was sent those not have ing replied. A total of 96 answers were received, some of them being letters. The quest ionnaire with correspon dence relating thereto, details of procedurs and methods of compilation, are given as an appendix, pp. A field trip was made to the west side of the Forest, September 19 to 22, 1924, inclusive. The period from October 14 to 21 was spent on the east side of the Forest. Typical sheep ranges on the Forest were examined while with the Forest Grazing Reconnaissance Party. Sev- eral sheep owners were interviewed. December 19, 1924, to January 10, 1925, sheep owners were interviewed. Foothill, valley, and farm con- ditions were observed through cooperation by members of the Wool Growers Association and the Forest Servi ce. Thirty-eight operators were personally inter- viewed, from whom quite complete infomation was secured. Valuable information was also received from ot hers. Of the thirty-nine permittees on the Czlifornia National . Forest, twenty-two representative persons were inter viewed. The following meetings were attended: Northern California Wool Growers, Corning, Cali fornia, October 25, 1924, California Wool Growers, San Francisco, California, November 6 and 7, 1924. Convention of National Wool Growers Association, San Francisco, California, January 21, 22 and 23, 1925, 2. Compilation of Data. - Data have been computed from fifty-two selected questionnaires repre- senting a total of 140,622 sheep. Of these 54,090 head belong to non-forest graziers and 86,532 are grazed on forest lands. Of the 86,532 head 43,530 are owned by permittees on the California Forest, 19,727 head being grazed there during 1924. The total authorization for sheep on the California National Forest in 1924 was 35,000. The fifty-two individual cases computed were then separated into the following eight classes: I. Forest Permittees Al Having one band or part thereof, lambing early A2 Having one band or part thereof, lambing late Bl Having two bands or over, lambing early B2 Having two bands or over, lambing late II. Non-Forest Permittees Cl Having one band or part thereof, lambing early C2 Having one band or part thereof, lambing late D1 Having two bands or over, lambing early D2 Heving two bands or over, lambing late By "early lambing" is meant those who lamb in time to grow and sell lambs prior to time foxtail becomes troublesome and before the opening of the Forest grazing season, approximately May 20th. "Late lambing" means lanbing late in winter, about February or Mare¢h. These lambs are not marketable prior to "foxtail" maturity or the opening of the Forest grazing season. II. FACTORS INFLUENCING INVESTIGATIONS A. California National Forest Summer Range l., Location and area. - The California Nat- ional Forest is located in the western part of north central California. It extends for seventy miles along the summit of the inner Coast Range Mountains. The eastern boundary runs along the foothills bordering the Sacramento Valley, while on the west the Forest extends almost to Round Valley, Hearst, Potter Valley and Upper Lake Valley. It comprises 1,062,572 acres, of which 242,795 acres are patented. 2. Topography, Climate, Water. Topography. - The topography is characterized by deep, rough canyons, and comparatively smooth and open ridges. The sharply cut water courses and steep slopes form in many places impassable barriers. The elevation along the western boundary is from 1500 to 4000 feet, averaging about 2250 feet. The eastern boun- dary is from 900 to 3000 feet, averaging 2000 feet. The main summit averages over 5000 feet. Climate. - "The climate of the North Coast Range is somewhat warmer than that of the high Sierras, the mean annual temperature being 65° F., mean maximum 75° F., and mean minimum 40° F. The nights are comfort- ably cool. On the western portion of the Forest, the heat of the day is often tempered by winds from the Paci f- ic, and occasionally there are fogs". Rainfall varies from 10 to 15 inches on the Sacramento valley side to 50 inches on the west side. (Graph 1) Nater. - The principal streams are Elder, Stony, and Thomas Creeks, flowing east,with the Cache Creek flowing south and east, into the Sacramento River; and headwaters of Middle and South Forks of Eel River, flowing into the Pacific Ocean. The approximate annual runoff is 1,392,000 acre feet. Out of several irrigation and power projects, the Yolo Water and Power Company, for example, diverts water for irrigation for the valuation of $40,000, 000. Lack of water on some of the ranges prevents epoch br deer dua, vi peer ede at droppin gu do feng spd she pope do SEE El t 3 fda ddd rid + fret cdot afte Lg ae Hi wir tn cb NG te fg ened A | Pi oi . UF gtr getter 1 1 dd degen on pei f 1 1 Foi | i i i + ¥ i t 4 } i | ra pe HH rbd dn pd te 3 i { I +4 i 1 { $ + i 3 i + +4 + rt i + | 3 + { + ! } ¥ 1 | ii i ¥ t i 4 oe pe es free eh dhe fpf hen i gh ed nb dh spi poe ar ft pba se hea { 4 o perf Spot ep fd po ppt pone + $id Porn de hob pip nts cpg og } ‘ tt matte od bara { mpd de ert fo oboe edd Ads Vo ——————— > o——— its use for grazing purposes. This is included in the 281,814 acres classified in the grazing report as unus- able for various reasons. Some areas on sheep allotments are also poorly watered, making it necessary to drive sheep as much as two miles or over to water. 3. Recreation and Game. - The California Forest is the most popular deer hunting area in the state. It has more deer than any National Forest in the United States, with the possible exception of the Kaibab Forest in Southern Utah and Arizona. An estimate of 40,000 head of deer graze on the Forest, about 10,000 being on sheep ranges. The Forest is visited by six thousand hunters a year during the hunting season. Hunting on the California Forest is probably the best in the United States. It is estimated that from 1200 to 1500 deer a year are taken by hunters. Bear are plentiful, and hunting these animals is popular in the late fall. Quail hunting is fair, but not so good as in the lower country adjacent to the For- est. Excellent trout fishing during the summer in most streams and steelhead fishing in the North Fork of the Eel River all combine to give this Forest great recreat- ional possibilities. No special tracts for summer home sites are yet laid out on the Forest, but many desirable sites are obtainable. With the development of new roads there will be attractive locations for summer home colonies at a number of points on the Forest. These recreational uses represent a great pub- lic asset. The Forest Service aims to manage livestock to retain a sufficient amount of suitable forage for the game animals and domestic animals belonging to campers. 4, Vegetation; Timber; Grazing types and their Efficiency. - The following table which includes the total receipts from the California Forest shows the present relative incomes. Receipts Cali fomia National Forest Fiscal Year 1924 Grazing cattle, horses and swine $4,831.85 sheep and goats 2,628.97 31.3 grazing trespass 57.66 $7,518.48 89.5 Timber sales 8705.58 Special use and trespass 175.96 881.54 10.5 To tal $8,400.02 100.00 Err ATI TAT TE ETRE RAR rE z 5 E re IO SC A i is Sasaki i iam ce cs A Timber. - An area of 391,300 acres or 49 per cent of the Forest is timberland. Nineteen coniferous species are found. Seven, namely Yellow Pine, Sugar Pine, Incense Cedar, White Fir, Douglas Fir, Red Fir and Jeffrey Pine, are merchantable. Besides the conifers, there are some relatively unimportant species of broad leaved trees. The total amount of green merchantable timber is 4,040,600 M feet B.M. and 200,000 cords of wood. At the average minimum value of $2.00 per M. feet B.M. for saw timber and $0.50 a cord for green cordwood, the total valuation is $8,180,200. Although most of this timber is as yet inaccessible, with the development of new forest roads it represents a valuable resource for future use. Grazing and Efficiency of Range Type. = There are four bases on which grazing management may be founded on the California National Forest - (1) timber, (2) browse, (3) annual grass, and (4) perennial grass types. These are important, but their relative impor- tance has not yet been determined. Grazing use is at present the greatest source of revenue, ad will prob- ably continue so for many years. Almost 90 per cent of actual receipts from the Forest during the fiscal year 1924 were from grazing use. A revenue of $7,460.82 was produced by grazing 34,473 cattle and horses, 64 swine, and 26,123 sheep and goats. These represent a large investment. The Forest on the whole is rather badly over- grazed in spite of the fact that in the last few years the authorization for livestock has been cut nearly in half. During 1922% authorization for grazing animals was 11,600 cattle and horses and 50,900 she ep and goats. It was estimated (1924 grazing report) that over 100,000 acres were overgrazed enough to injure the forage cover and affect forage reproduction. Sheep and goats injured 20,000 acres of Yellow Pine and Fir. Cattle, horses, and sheep were in good condition on entering in the spring. On coming off the Forest range cattle and horses were generally poor. Sheep and goats were only good to fair. It is obvious that overgrazing which results in injury to forage cover, damage to conifer reproduction and watersheds or excessive competition with foraging game l. United States Forest Service Range Appraisal Report. 1922. animals is almost equally objectionable to the stock owner. For this reason the establishment of proper seasons and numbers will result in ultimate benefit to Forest and stock- mene B. Winter Range; Foothill Lands l. XYorage and its use. - The foothill ranges adjacent to the California Forest supply a good growth of forage, beginning after the first rains in October. Be=- cause of dry conditions, September rains usually fail to germinate seeds. The forage on these foothill lands is essentially annual vegetation, mostly "foxtail" grasses; species of alfilaria (Erodium) and bur clover (Medicago). During the lat ter part of December, January and most of February there is little growth because of cold weather. With the first warm days in late February growth again commences. The majority of sheep men lamb at this time on account of abundant succulent forage and favorable weather conditions. Most annual grasses are very palatable to sheep until they begin heading out, early in April. After that the feed consists mostly of alfilaria, bur clovers, and other annual nongrasses. i SRR TSO SE es Rr i em A EET OUR Mechanically injurious plants. - Many of the Poit ge, planks at the time of seed maturity bear awns or sharp pointed seed coats which are injurious to sheep, especially lambs. Among the plants which cause injury are: Hordeum jubatum (Squirrel tail Barley) Hordeum murinum (Wall Barley) Hordeum gussoneanum (Pacific Barley) Sitanion sp. Known as squirrel tail or foxtall grasses Stipa comata (Needle and fread) Bromus tectorum (Downy Brome or June Brome Grass) Bromus rubens (Red Brome or Broncho Grass) Bromus rigidus ("Ripgut" grass) Erodium all species (Alfilaria) The grasses listed above are ordinarily called "foxtalil" grasses by the sheepmen. I ET ry edi SER FTRR In May the "foxtail" grasses begin to mature and about May 15 or 20 the awns become so stiff they work into the lambs' flesh, causing sores and loss of weight from suffering, or blindness, resulting from awns getting into the lambs' eyes. For this reason by May 20 to June 1 lambs must either be put on meadow, or stub- ble, or on other areas free from "foxtail". Some sheep- men shear the lambs at this time and are able to keep them on annual grass pasture, but the sheep must be looked over daily and "foxtail" removed from their eyes. The practice of running during this period on this range is not practicable, because the feed is dried up and un- palatable, causing the sheep to lose in weight. 3. ¥ater. - The grazing season on much of the winter range is limi ted to the period when water from temporary springs and creeks is available. 4, Balance of Summer and Winter Range. = Winter range is available for many more sheep than can be supported by the summer ranges. Of the 2,621,000 sheep in the State of California the National Forests graze approximately one half million head during the summer season. For this reason there is great demand for summer range. Lack of summer range tends to be the limiting fac- tor of sheep production in the area studied. 5S. Season of Lambing. - The time of lambing is largely determined by climate and succulent forage. In the area studied in which most of the Forest permittees reside, lambing is in Tebruary and early March. This re- sults in two or three months old lambs being taken onto the California Forest. They are grazed there during the entire summer. At the time of going to the mountains they are not old enough to market and have not reached milk fat condition. On leaving the Forest in the last of August or early September they have passed the stage of best condition and are mostly feeders, weighing about 65 pounds. The class of feed on the Forest is of ten not conducive to the best growth of lambs. The owners can- not afford to take their lambs to market until all their sheep are taken out because it is a long drive ts the valley. I rar ttt] E24 lg Rae EA darrian 6. Early lambing. - A few forest permittees and quite a number of the non-pemittees who are favorably situated lamb early. Ordinarily early lambing begins about November 20 and continues until February l. The ob- ject of lambing early is to produce a marketable lamb be- fore the foxtail is bad and at the same time take advantage of the early and higher market. Early lambing is practiced quite extensively in the area called the "Thermal Belt", which lies to the west of Willows and Maxwell in the foothills. In this area warmer climatic conditions obtain and very little if any supplemental feed is needed. Forest permittees generally lamb late because ewes are not bred until the band returns from the Forest, usually in September. The permittee ranches are largely pasture propositions and lambing cammot be begun until the feed and weather conditions are suitable. In order to lamb early it would be necessary to do some supple- mental feeding. The permittees would have to buy or develop farm land to raise the extra feed needed for lambing or else purchase feed outright. Another objec- tionable feature from the permittees' standpoint is that it would be necessary to take rams into the mountains separately and bring them out again, which would take considerable time and expense. Ce. Market An analysis of the monthly receipts of sheep and lambs marketed in the United States shows marketing largely a seasonal matter. This is especially true of lambs because a large percentage are marketed as grass- fed stock. When the grass season ends those sold as prime must go to market. According to Sneider? and the report on the sheep industry in the U. 8. D. A. Yearbook of January, 19233, October stands out as the month of 2. Sneider. 8easonal Marketing of Lambs. U.S.D.A. Bureau of Economics ubpublished report 1925. 3. The Sheep Industry. U.S.D.A. Yearbook 1923, Pe 279. = iid iii Prd rrr Lit OL EE LE EL EL LL eth TE PRA ARE 5s 1 LEI dd Lip i atid d) Sasa Ar Ladi tS es Ro a I FF PR A ee ¥ . a N wr iim heaviest receipts of sheep and lambs at 67 chief public markets, and is followed closely by September, August and November. (Graph 2) These months mark the end of the grazing season on the western ranges and summer pas- ture forage in the Corn Belt. April and May are among the months of light- est marketing in the United States. In California these are the months of heaviest marketing. In recent years the California spring lambs which are marketed in April and May are an important market fac tor. It is advisable to ship to middle-western and eastern markets from Cali- fornia during these months to take advantage of the high- er price. Early sales also help to stabilize the Pacific Coast markets during the remainder of the season. Graph 2 shows also the seasonal variation of receipts and average prices of western lambs at Chicago, 1003-1918. The California spring lamb shipments east ae shown on the graph indicate that the bulk of sales is concentrated in the months of April amd May, just be=- fore the drop of prices due to the increasing supply of a ta eal 3-3 FFT EER PES TR nee DR 5 ” ~ = e : wo : a Co Ms a a = $ + + feted dnp rd Ag pepe 4 Ap wep pus dedyg iF prose Tey lambs from other parts of the country. California grow- ers advantageously market at the time stated. Producers on the California Forest for the most part market their lambs in autumn. It is not feasible, however, to market lambs taken onto the California Forest until the end of the grazing season. The drive to the railroad is long and good forage enroute ie not available, thus result ing in heavy shrinkage. To market the lambs prior to autumn would necessitate driving the ewes out with the lambs and then returning to the Forest with the breeding herd. Although such delivery of lambs to market is practiced on some other TOTNES, mainly where the railroad is close in, trailing is not practicable for operators us- ing the California Forest. Unfortunately, when the lambs are left on the Forest until in autumn, they have passed the best milk fat condition and generally are sold as feeders. III. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATIONS Table No. 1, summarizing the costs, receipts and net income of early and late lambing under the four systems of operation is plotted and shown in graphs 3 and 4. Table 1. Costs, receipts and net income in dollars per head of early and late lambing under the 4 systems of operation A Or Forest permittees Non Forest permittees Small Large | Small Large Early Late Earl ate Early Late Early Late ___ A 5 B. Ek Oy Bg By D, Receipts $8.761 8.680 8.230 8.470 9.530 8.532 9.160 8.813 Cost 7.395 7.790 7.010 7.920 7.520 7.759 6.630 6.722 Net 1.366 «890 1.220 «550 2.010 «770 2.530 2.090 Average Net income of early lambs $1.781 " " " " late " 1.075 $ .706 tet ccc chug pee ppp ee pg pee FER RRERSE S + Verade Jit t } Ler an bpp pn pp A ASAI AA A 8 i + 1 + t 1 Bi { ‘OWNERS hobo Appr Sot SOLE SPAPE PRE 1 ReE Lees Fi HH I 7 + 4 / YA FLA Saas SMALL OWKERS At tt ep pe bed tr J 2 Lid dpe : ++ Fd 1 LE feted erred LARGE OWNER ETAL ZA rol AO ATL, A I 7 duy day sem pest pppoe st inp ps pga etl For Forest permittees having only one hand or less the net return for those lambing early is $1.366, as compared to $0.890 for those lambing late. This means a net profit of $0.48 a head greater for the operators who practice early lambing. In every case (Graph 4) those lambing early have a greater net income than those lambing late. Gen- erally those lambing early do so because they are operat- ing under conditions which make this practice possible without providing shelter or supplemental feeds. On the other hand, the operators lambing late generally do so because of poor weather conditions and lack of suitanle lambing forage until the later date. Many of these must provide shelter and furnish supplemental feed to carry the ewes over the period of inclement weather. This may explain why the average cost for those lambing late is greater in every case than for those who lamb early. The greatest difference is found in small op=- erators who are not forest permittees. Early lambers in this group secure an average net profit of $2.01 as compared to $0.77 for those lambing late, the difference OF fi Ue Ti Foor nt 5 OF OPERATION. | eet frp ———— bo —————————————————————— Small owners Larde Owners’ i | Small owners EH Latde Owners. Forest pormifiees Hh ft Permit ces abot pri p———-—————————————— being $1.24 a head. One reason for this is that many non- forest permittees owning small bands operate under extreme- ly favorable conditions or carry on their sheep business as a side issue. The average net income for those lambing early is §1.781, and for those lambing late $1.075, giving an average difference of $0.706, or 66% in favor of the op- erators who lamb early. In the case of Forest permittees the average difference in favor of early lambing is $0.575 a head. Forest permittees owning small bands in 1924, and marketing late, had an average of 817 lambs to sell per 1000 ewes, while those lambing early had an average of 845 lambs per 1000 ewes. This shows an additional loss of 28 lambs per 1000 ewes for those lambing late. This is caused by predatory animals, poisonous plants, and various other reasons, due to carrying their lambs on till the end of the Forest grazing season. The average cost a ewe a year was found to be $7.38, or approximately two cents a day. The cost of run- ning sheep under the various systems of operation was rather uniform. The average expense a head a day on the different classes of range was: National Forest Range $0.0210 Foothill range 0.0177 Stubble lands 0.02025 Farm or ranch 0.0194 The gross receipts were found to average $8.772 per head. The average price obtained a head for lambs sold during April and May, as found in the compilations, was $7.03, and for those sold later was $6.15. This dif- ference in price is accounted for by the advantage in price during April and May. The operators who practiced lambing under properly constructed sheds, and depend on supplemental feeds due to inclement weather, pay a head an average of: $0.675 for hay, $0.35 for concentrates (usually corn), and $0.115 for lambing sheds, - a total of $1.13. From the results it is evident that early lambing when feasible is more profitable. Additional expenses under certain favorable conditions would be justified to lamb early. A determination of the feasi- bility and economic advantages of the practice for each individual case must te determined from reliable data. Most sheepmen do not keep books. Accurately kept records will be the only means of determining the best system of operation. Following are two typical examples of Forest permittees each running 1000 ewes, the protective limit established for this Forest. Example 1. Lambing early. Example 2. Lambing late. These are taken from actual cases, but costs of hay, salt, etc., from actual cases, however, are prorated to 1000 head. The average wages for labor are used. FLOCK CHARGES Interest on flock " working capital Taxes and insurance Ram service LOSSES Predatory animals Poison plants Di sease and accidant Replacement RANGE AND PASTURE Tax and interest Rent or fes SUPPLEMENT ARY FEED Hay Concentrates Labor of feeding Feed, Work animals IMPROVEMENTS House Barn Lambing sheds Shearing sheds Fences Corrals Dipping vats Watering improvements Example 1 1000 ewes @ $10 each, 6% int. 3000 @ 6% (carries no insurance on sheep) 18 rams @ $30; Int. $32; taxes $6, feed and care $54; replacement $150; less wool #72 30 ewes @ $10+ (Losses are not charged as a cost because they are taken 16 ewes © $10 21 ewes @ $10 care of in replacement) No depreciation because replacement is made 222 ewe lambs to replace losses 67 head, and ewes sold 155 @ $9 a head Tax and grazing fee on forest allotment Usually don't feed (1924 fed hay) None fed ‘No extra labor Grain on Forest, $17; 6 tons hay on ranch, @ 20 Value $1500, Interest & depreciation, $90; Tax §24; Upkeep 2% = $30 Value $500; Depreciation, #17, Int. $15 None used Uses a neighbor's shed for shearing None owned None required $600 180 128 170 (300) (160) (210) 1998 1175 104 144 32 32 25 Le LABOR EQUIPMENT Saddles Camp pakc wagon, etc. Manager Bookkeeping Herding Camp tending Board Trailing Tagging Lamb dock mark Shear brand Dipping Work animals Auto use Dogs MARKET ING MISC. Yool Lambs and mutton *HANDLING COSTS Salt Sacks Twine Paint Dip Association fee Other Example 1 - cont'd. 3 pack outfits, $27; 1 camp outfit, §10; wagon, $15 Done by self No extra cost Two men labor and board, 4 days Extra man and board 45 days 5 head (Int., depreciation and taxes, $11 a head) 5000 miles @ 10¢ a mile 3; standard $5 each Hauling 8 loads @ §5 a load Sells at ranch, no extra cost to drive to cars Two tons © $16 33 sacks @ 67¢ each For branding None used 12 52 1200 900 300 35 150 229 55 500 15 82 RANGE IMPROVEMENTS Pred. animal control TOTAL COSTS Per head Per day RECEI PTS Wool Tags Pelts Mutton Lambs TOTAL RECEIPTS Net® >» Example 1 conc. Guns, ammunition, etc. $3.40 per head 370 @ 18¢ 15 @ $1.80 each Sells 155 ewes @ $4.00 845 lambs @ $7.03 10 8597 3,400 67 PA 620 __ 5,940 $10,054 $1,457 62 Example 2 FLOCK CHARGES Interest on flock * working capital Taxes and insurance Ram service LOSSES Predatory animals Poison plants Disease and accident Replacement RANGE AND PASTURE Tax and interest Rent or fee SUPPLEMENTARY FEED Hay Concentrates Labor of feeding Feed, Work animals IMPROVEMENTS House Barn Lambing sheds Shearing sheds Fences Corrals wo bpine YS ovensnts i A BA ES ER aE 1000 ewes @ $10, interest 6% $3000 " " (no insurance carried) 16 rams, $30 each = $29 int. $140 re- placement; Tax $5; care and feed, $58 less wool $64 34 ewes @ $10 each (Losses all taken care 17 ewes @ $10 each of by replacement; no 16 ewes @ $10 each money loss) Since old stuff is replaced there is no depreciation 222 ewe lambs to replace losses, 67 head and ewes sold, 155 @ £9 a head On ranch Rent stubble and pasture $750; Grazing fee $118 (Corn) Grain in forest $30; Hay at ranch $120 Value $1500; Int. $45; tax $21; Upkeep and insurance $12, depreciation $30 Value $1000; Int. $30; tax $11; Upkeep and insurance $19; depreciation, $20 EQUIPMENT LABOR Saddles Camp pack wagon, Manager Book Keeping Herding Camp tending Board Trailing Tagging Lamb dock mark Shear brand Dipping York animals Auto use Dogs MARKETING MISC. Wool Lambs and mutton *HANDLIRG COSTS Salt Sacks Twine Paint Dip Association fee Other etc. Example 1 - cont'd Yearlong @ $70 a month Does own packing $25 a month for herder No extra cost 6 horses (Deprec. etc. $11 each a year) 5000 miles € 10g a mile Two; $5 a year each Hauling to warehouse Extra labor hire to get lambs to cars Twe tons © $15 a ton 25 sacks @ 68¢ each RANGE IMPROVEMENTS Pred. animal control prorated overhead TOTAL COSTS RECEIPTS Wool Tags Pelta Mutton Lambs TOTAL RECEIPTS Net* Example 2 =~ conc. 10 $8867 off a head @ 38¢ = 3.42 x 1000 3420 360# © 20¢ 72 10 pelts @ $2.20 22 Loses 67; sells 1/6 remainder @ $4 (old ewes) 620 817 lambs @ $6.15 per head 5025 $9159 $ 202 33 In the above examples $1998.00 is charged for replacement of ewes, a cost of almost two dollars a head. In individual cases computed, replacement was made by taking ewe lambs from the lambing band. Con- sequently no amount is shown for replacement, since no actual money was spent. This will account for the difference which occurs between average costs and re- ceipts where these two systems of replacement are used. Owners having two bands or over generally operate at less expense a head. Less labor and mana- gerial costs occur, as sheep may be run some of the time in larger bands. Besides, one camp tender may often tend two or even three bands. IV. CONCLUSIONS (1) The California Forest is important from the standpoint of forage and irrigation water, and to a lesser extent for timber. It is of great importance to keep the plant cover in a high state of productivity and the watersheds in good condition. Stockmen are dependent on the Forest to a considerable extent for their summer range. (2) The number of domestic stock grazed on the Forest in 1924 was 3,473 cattle and horses, 64 swine, and 26,123 sheep. Approximately 40,000 deer graze on the Forest. This large number of foraging animals has caused deterioration of the range. The grasing capacity of the California Forest is much be- low its possibilities. (3) Both early and late lambing is prac- ticed by p ermittees on the California Forest. This diversification in operation is accounted for chiefly by the great difference in conditions of winter range and differences of opinion of operators as to the gain from these practices. (4) Cost data shows greater net income for early lambing in the various systems of operation. This income will be greater as long as additional expenses of the practice do rot exceed the dif ference which may be received for lambs sold early. (5) Early lambing practice by Forest per- mittees will result in: saving of forage on the Forest, because of the absence of lambs; selling of fat lambs instead of feeders; a larger percentage of lambs mar- keted, and the possibility of running a larger number of breeding stock on the Forest. (6) The possibility for early lambing is a problem to be decided for individual cases. It is es~ sential for the sheepmen to keep accounts in order to determine what practices are most feasible. In the cooperation of the sheep owners with the Forest Service accurately kept records will show what practices are to economic advantage. The most economic practices may lead to improvement of forest and forage conditions. Acknowledgement The writer wishes to thank the following persons and acknowledge their help: Dr. A. W. Sampson, and Professors C. M. Titus and R. F. Miller. Also he feels deeply indebted to the Wool Growers, their re- presentatives, and others who gave freely of their time and information. TEP en SNseesrey = »” rt = = Ei Pu fe wa CALIFORNIA YOOL GROWERS ASSOCIATION Santa Fe Building Telephone Douglas 1636 San Francisco, California October 27, 1924. Dear Member: The Forest Service informs us that it now finds it necessary to shorten the season of grazing and to reduce the numbers of sheep grazed on the Cali- fornia Forest. Due to the shorter grazing season pro- posed, it means that a critical forage problem is now before the sheep owners who are dependent on the use of these lands. All the data possible must be col- lected both from the users of the National Forest land and also from sheep owners who do not run their sheep on the Nutional Forest, so that this matter can be adjusted satisfactorily to all concerned. The Foxtail problem will also te s tudied along with this work. At our request, the Division of Forestry of the University of California has under taken to make a study of the situation. The foraze problem will be studied carefully by three range experts, Dr. A. VW. Sampson, Mr. V. B. Miller, and Mr. Harry Malmsten. It will be necessary to secure figures on the cost of raising sheep both on National Forest range and on private lands. The cost of raising sheep of one individual will in no case be given to the public. Feel free to state the facts. For this purpose a question- naire is enclosed which we request you to fill out in full and mail as soon as possible. Ye will appreciate your help in collecting this data. Very sincerely you rs, (Signed) W. P. Wing SECRETARY. CALIFORNIA WOOL GROWERS ASSOCIATION SANTA FE BUILDING SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA Nov. 26, 1924 A few weeks ago a letter requesting you to fill out an enclosed questionnaire was sent you. No reply so far has been received from you. Perhaps you have not found time; possibly you are working on the outline now. It is for you and other California sheepmen that this project is being carried on and its value depends on your giving all the desired information as accurately as possible. It pays to know the facts. We would greatly appreciate hearing from you a® soon as possible. May we not have the pleasure of hearing from you? Address reply as directed on questionnaire to Division of Forestry, University of California, 305 Hilgard Hall, perkeley, Cali fornia, using envelope which was enclosed. Very sincerely yours, (8igned) W, P, Wing Secretary A RP RR RE TER EE ey ra on a a a Ls RR, Sl A Srey ey ela Nee Sa INFORMATION DESIRED Name (owner or operator) Address (county) Do you lease or own the sheep handled! (Lease cost a year) Location of range used (own) " ® farm or ranch Number of grown sheep, exclusive of lambs Breed or breeds Do you raise your sheep on (1) Open range exclusively? (2) Fenced range exclusively? (3) Ranch or farm exclusively? (4) Combination of some of these? DC ————————— iii as Do you lamb under sheds or in the open? Method used (individual pen, etc.) Vhat 4 of lambs did you mark? Do you shear twice or only once a year? No. of sheep sheared Wt. of yearly Price a pound received for wool (1924) an addins eT sd RAR Sree ol Th i; a dt - hee Fe eT heh TE EIN es eg : > TA a °c REDE vy BRE ERR gate x AEE HT FE Fo + 3 - How much of your personal time is taken up in management of your sheep business a year? Value a month How much of your ranch foreman or superintendent's time is used in management of your business a year? Value a month How much time is spent on accounts and bookkeeping? IRAE I Value a month Table I. Range description (acreage over which your sheep range during year) Open Range :Fenced:Ranch or Farm NationtPub-:State :Purely sheep wn al :11¢ : qr Range:sDiversified; Forest: Do-:R.R. : (grain,etec.)___ tmain: : es 89 08 9% so» *e as ©@ Acreage or size of allotment oe ho 3 - i» os ee oe ae se Value an acre “Farm acres used } - by sheep’ Crazing fee a head rental cost or taxds® : i Miles of fence where fence occurs * ee oe ee se es "ee . 8 se oe .e es ae se *e v »% "ne ee re Average cost a mile ae ae 1 1] ee ee Vatering conditions Plenti ful Table I. (conc. ) Open Range :Fenced: Ranch or Farm Nation-:Pub-:State_Range:Purely sheep __ al $ lier or: :Diversifi ed; Forest :Do- :R.R.: :(grain,etes) :majin: : : ee -. 8 *e as Scarce? Season . . Average dis- tance to water . Season grazed (Months used) . Topography, rough, rolling, or level = Is area improving, deteriorating, or standing still un- der present use . and seasons Kind of forage Brush (Browse) Principal) forage Weeds plants ) )Grass Do cattle use game range? 2 Approximate number cattle using area : Season cattle graze: Remarks: vi Table II. Supplementary feeds : Hay : Crain : Stubble How long a period do you feed?: How many tons of hay a band? or lbe.s- a ewe for grain _: : i *e Yhat months? : bo ve se .e What kind of hay, grain and : stubble Average value or cost a ton : Cost for stubble a band a month “Average labor cost of feeding hay or grain during year : 8 ° se 06 ee 89 Table III. Stocking and Handling Purebreds If you have any purebreds raised or marketed as breeding steck, answer this table as well as table IV, - if not, answer table IV only. Breed se a Numb er Le Value a head 1924-5 bo po .e Average age when sold Number sold iw Price obtained a head * : Month of heaviest sales *e Table IV. Stocking and handling sheep other than those raised and sold especially as breeding stock Milk :Weaned Ewes :Wethers: Lambs: Lambs Number Value a head, 1924-25 Average aze when sold Number sold a year Average weight Sold fat or as feeders Price obtained a head or a lb. . Month of heaviest sales 3 Yearly average no. used on ranch for meat: Average annual loss from (1) Predatory animals Season of most loss Animal causing most loss Jeefl v deeys uo pied eouRJINSU] avek v deeys uo pied sexs] od on oe .e ssot 3sow jo uos®eg y 3 : ? s30a (¥) g : : ge g80T 380W JO UO0S®BES 3 T : ? - esme) x : T esweo sip pu® ‘sseuydis ‘3uepiod¥V (g) : . ' ; ® 8807 380m 3uismed jJUBId o— : : ? T g80T 3} Sow JO UOS®eS os on *e “os sqaue 1d snouostiod (2) Wwol} €80T TBNUUB ATaRe) (*ouo0d) “AI eTqQBlL Table V. Investment, Improvement, and Equipment s [3 ? ! ? * . Where Vhat Estimated Annual Value located : percent-: Value : life : cost : at end or used age or (years of of of :farmstead: used by :or range : sheep : cost : service): upkeep useful - - * * > : period Buildings : : : Sheds : Fences Corrals Dipping vats Sheep wagon Saddles Watering improvements: Salting troughs : Table V. (conc.) Pack outfits Ropes, tents & miscel. Shearing equipment Other equipment Auto Horses How much working capital (cash available for running expenses) must you have! § Automobile Incidental Costs Marketing Number of horses or mules used for handling sheep Average value a head Tons of hay fed horses a year " " grain ”" " ”" " Le Yhat make and model car do you use? How many miles do you run a year? What 4 or number of miles may be attributed to handling or management of sheep? Relative use in connection with Forest Crazing Kind of salt used Tons of sale used a band Cost a ton Wool sacks: Number Twine: amount Dip " Branding paint © Veterinary expense Other items Where do you market your sheep? yy mM " wool? xii What is the extra cost a head of getting your sheep to market? (From range or ranch to shipping point) What is the extra cost per 100f of getting your wool to market? (From range or ranch to shipping point) Do you sell F,0.B. or off cars destination? Name shipping point and destination of lambs either San Francisco, Santa Rose, etc. Table VI. Labor Cost No. days: Extra labor Month done :required cost eT sn oo Breeding (including cost of ke eping bucks) Dipping Lambing Shearing lst time If twice yearly, 2nd time Branding Docking mand Marking Tagging Trailing between ranges Sheep on open range System of herding used No. ewes a band Herder, wages a month Number employed a band Are dogs used? How Many ? Value each Camp tender or packer, wages a month Cost of board a man a month om fenced range, or ranches Average time required a day for care and tending No. of men Cost a month a man ARRAS AR EL Address reply to ¥m. B. Miller, Room 30% Hilgard Hall, University of California, Berkeley, Calif. Method of Compiling Data Individual The following case is presented to show method of computing data from individual questionnaires received. General of Orland, Glenn Co., California, owns 3500 sheep grazing 2400 head May 1 to September 1 on the California National Forest during which time the re- maining 1100 head are pastured out at a charge of 25¢ a head a month. During the remainder of the year the en- tire 3500 head are kept on stubble and farm land. Key number (Individual Case) Number of Sheep 3500 Breed of Ewes Merino Breed of Rams Mer ino Time of lambing Feb. 15 for 35 days Time of marketing lambs October Weight of lambs | 664 + Price received a pound 9¢ Price received a head $6.00 Number sold Wool, pounds a head Wool, price a pound Tags, pounds & head Tags, price a pound Pelts, number saved Pelts, price each Specific Costs were computed from information in the questionnaire as follows: Flock charges (1) Interest on flock 2800 breeding ewes @ $10 each 700 yearling ewes © 7 equals 32,900 e 6% Interest on working capital requires $4 a head running expenses or $14,000 @ 6% Taxes and insurance (carries no insurance) Ewes are &ssessed $4 each, rate is $0.02224 = §$).0896 x 3500 Ram service 70 head @ §30 each = $2100 @ 6% - $122 interest; assessed $10 each, ratio $.0224 = §16.00; replaces 15 head a year © $30 = $450; ex- changes about 10 head a year pay- ing $10 extra a head $100; feed and care 25¢ a head a month = $270 642 Losses (5) From predatory animals, 50 head on Forest and 20 head on ranch @ $10 ea. (700) (6) From poisonous plants, 50 head on Nationgl Forest (500) (7) Disease, accident, lambing, etc. 45 head on ranch and 10 head other (550) Since losses are taken of in replacement costs they are not included as cost. (8) Depreciation Since old stock are disposed of and replacement by young ewes is made there is no depreciation charge. (9) Replacement 700 ewes per year less loss of 175 head or 525 ewes scld € $3.67 per head as feeders, $1925 700 ewe lambs to replace those lost and sold kept velue §7 each = $4900 less 1925 2975 Range and Pasture (10) 1760 acres on National Forest owned, value $2 an acre $3520 x 6%, $211.20 interest; adding $45 tax 256 Permit for 2400 sheep for this paying a fee on 1250 of $168.75 from May 1 169 to September 1 ; During this time payment of 25¢ a head a month to have someone else feed and care for the remaining 1100 head September 1 to December 1 the entire band is on stubble 1900 acres rented @ 70g an acre December 1 to May 1 the entire band is on ranch 6000 acres value $10 an acre © 6% = $3600 interest; plus tax, $989.88 Supplemental Feed (14) Hay (none fed) (15) Concentrates (none fed) (16) Labor of feeding (no cost) (17) Feed for work animals 6 tons of hay @ $15 = $90; 2 tons grain fed on Forest = $80 Improvements (18) House value $4000 @ 3% interest = $120; lasts 50 years = $80 depreciation; insurance #3; upkeep 2% - 880; tax §56 339 (19) Barn value $600 @ 3% interest - §18; lasts 50 years = $12 depreciation; insurance $1; upkeep $20; tax §9 (20) Lambing sheds - lambs in open - does not even use jails. No cost (21) Shear ing sheds - value $300 @ 3% in- terest = $0; lasts 25 years gs $12 de- preciation; upkeep 5% = $15 (22) Fences - 10 miles on National Forest @ $300 per mile @ 3% interest = $20; 1% upkeep $30; lasts 25 years = $75 depreciation 195 30 miles on ranch @ $300 per mile @ 3% interest = $270 interest; 1% upkeep $20; lasts 25 years = $225, depre=- ciation 585 Corrals - value $500 @ 37 « $15 int- erest; upkeep = $20; last 20 years = $25 depreciation 60 Dipping vats - made of cement, last indefinitely, value $100 € 6% interest Watering improvements - made of cement, last indefinitely; value $200 € 6% 12 Four saddles (standard velue $50 each) life 20 years; interest, tax, upkeep depreciation = $6 each Two pack outfits, cost a year §9 each - $18; 3 camp outfits, cost a year $10 each = $30 Own work at $150 per month No books kept Two herders 4% monts @ $75 on National Forest and getting on and off forest = $675 Two herders 3 months @ §75 per month on stubble = $450 Two herders 44 months @ §75 per month on ranch = $675 a tN BSD FS A a (31) (32) One camp tender 43 months @ $75 per month on National Forest Board $25 per man per month, 3 men 4% months on National Forest = $337; 2 men 3 months while sheep are on stubble = $150; 2 men 4} months on ranch = $225 (33) Average extra cost of trailing - (34) (35) (40) Marketing (41) (42) estimated Tagging 3500 @ 237 each = $87.50; 2 men board 5 days = $10 Lambing, docking and marking, 3 extra men @ §75 per month for 35 days = $262; board for men & §25 per man per month = $88 Shearing and branding 3750 head © 121¢ rate = $446. Board of crew and 4 extra men = $41; extra labor, $48 No dipping Three mules @ standard rate $10 each per year = $30; three horses @ $11 each per year = $33 Value two cars $3470; resale value in five years = $700 « $2770; in- terest @ 3% = $83; depreciation = $554; garage bills, tax and license = $360 997 Two dogs at rate of §5 each per year 10 Wool - no cost; uses his own truck Lambs and mutton; no cost, uses regular herders Miscellaneous - Handling costs (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) Salt, 5 tons € $19 per ton Sacks, 100 wool sacks @ 65¢ each Twine, 100 lbs. @ 22¢ per 1b. Branding paint Dip, 2 gallons @ $2.50 per gallon Association fees: Pacific Co- operative Wool Growers, = $15; California Wool Growdrs $s Other Expenses Range Improvement (50) Predatory animal control, ammunition, etc. 20 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $22,711 Receipts (51) (52) (53) (54) Wool: 3500 x 8% lbs. per sold at 423¢ per lb. 12,985 Tags, 1330 1lb.s @ 20¢ 266 Lambs: 2176 sold; 66 lbs. each @ 9¢ per 1lb.;(average $6 per head) 13,056 ARI IE AER 39 pelts © $1.70 each 66 TOTAL RECEIPTS $26,373 NET GAIN 3,662 de wo a fine te Soy ee ER a —— RN A En EE = For a band of 3500 ewes Total receipts $26,373 Total expenses 22,711 Net income 3,662 Per head 1.05 In individual cases all item of expense do not occur. For example only 23% of the Forest permit- tees having small bands and lambing late have dipping vats. Where this cost occurs the amount is $0.016 per head. The same is true of the use of supplemental feeds - only 54% feeding hay and only 399, of the opera- tors feeding concentrates. For this reason a total of all the weighted average costs per head will exceed the actual average total cost per head. Any individual meking use of these data can determine the items which do not occur in his particular case and thus determine what his expenses should be. An example is shown in Table II under head- ing "Individual", which is the summary of total charges and receipts for one member falling in the Forest per- mittees having one band or part thereof lambing late late class. Grouping members of each class, computa- tions were made as to (1) total costs of each item per group, (2) number of sheep on which the costs occurred, (3) percentage of cases in the group from which these figures were derived, ad (4) the weighted average cost per head. (Table II, A, columns 1, 2, 3, and 4.) In the above manner 52 cases were compiled, sub-divided and summarized under the eight headings, namely: Forest permittees Ay Owners having one band or part thereof, lambing early. A, Owners having one band or part thereof, lambing late. Owners having two bands or over, lambing early. Owners having two bands or over, lambing late. Non-permittees Cy Owners having one band or part thereof, lambing early. Table III systems of Table 1V Owners having one band or part thereof, lambing late. Owners having two bands or over, lambing early. O wners having two bands or over, lambing late. Averages of the eight classes into which operation were divided. Compiled from averages in Table III. Sheep on stubble. Foothill farm of Forest Permitee. RA SI RENE 3. Chamise (Adenostoma montana) browse range on the California Forest. Though supporting rather abundant vegetation this type of range is practically valueless for grazing domes- tic stock. 4. Timbered range on sheep allotment above Deafy Glade, Cali- fornia Forest. Over utilization here has resulted in the disappearance of most forage. § ooo. Soe esse Snow Mountain near 8. Perennial grass range in foreground on sheep is grown on Big Rock. Much of the forage used by Similar high rather open ridges. Burnt area on browse range, Snow Mountain sheep allotment. The dead brush can be seen above the new growth. Same as 6. Te ® te Oy © [0 f= n = Oo oO 2 ™ 2 wm 0 o $4 vd _- o = : i 8. Head of Paradise Creek, on sheep allotment. Years of heavy overgrazing have resulted in erosion of a deep gully through this mountain me adow. 10. A badly overgrazed area on sheep allotment near Big Rock Pasture. This ramits surface runoff of water, resulting in erosion and lack of soil moisture for forage growth. 11. White Thorn (Ceanothus cordulatus) a valuable browse species. The bare open area should support some vege- tation under proper grazing by livestock. Hampshire ewes lambed under bad weather conditions. Lambs of this breed are very hardy and withstand severe weather conditions when young. 13. Hampshire-merino ewes in valley pasture. 14. Shearing shed and branding pens belonging to operator. 13. Hampshire-merino ewes in valley pasture. Shearing shed and oranding pens operator. 15. Lambing sheds equipped with individual pens and feeding troughs. This type of shed is not costly to comstruct. Foothill range on lave country east of Red Bluff, Calif. 17. Foothill range along Thomas Creek adjacent to the Califor- nia Forest. Much of the browse is Buckbrush (Ceanothus sp.). This brush and rocks afford protection for lamb- Burnt area on foothill range. Rapid growth of new forage takes place after burning. xxxiii 19. Typical winter range in oak and chaparral west of Paskenta near the California Forest. 20. Sheep grazing on foothill range. 19. Typical winter range in oak and chaparral west of Paskenta near the California Forest. grazing on foothill range. 21. Salting sheep on the Lambing band in valley pasture near Willows. 23, Corralling sheep for the night. 24, Sheep on foothill range east of Stony Creek. °5, Foothill range near Frutc, head of Clark Valley. Teed vegetation in foreground; oak on slope and chumise along the ridge. Table II Forest Permittees having one band or less, lambing late (A.) 3 : : Numbér :Per cent: t of : of : Weighted Total : sheep : cases : average costs on to which: costs for which : these : per group costs : costs : head occur apply oH * Individua (Key no.- 7) .e "ee fod - oe e aw “ne "ee "en GENERAL Average number owned : 1000 : Breed of Ewes : Merino : Eresed of Rams t Ramboullet: Date of lambing :Feb. Mar.: Date of selling :Sept.Oct. Weight of lambs 7 Price a pound : 83¢ " ® head $5.95 Number sold 800 Wool # a head 8 * price a pound : 4lg Tags pounds a head n price a pound 14342 : 1103 : 3M 4R +30,4M,3Ha,1Cct tJan. Feb. Mar. :July & Oct. 87d S942 £5.92 202 of 38¢ oe e - » * - - - “9 2% 0% 40 ee Wn» LL EE 1 1 *e 99 re “rr #0 Be 09 0 ® 10 00 8% 00 #9 9 9% 0 BP we »e oe ae ee RANGE : Cost a head r Nat'l Forest : " "Mm Foothill range aM " Stubble : "er " Farm or ranch es we 0 “9% 8 so '. "ee 00 ee "ese “oe “ee 20 8 ae te eo "e FLOCK CHARGES Interest on flock n * working capital Taxes and Insurance Ram service .e . 0 so we Table II LOSSES Predatory animals Poisonous plants Disease and accident Depreciation Replacement 9 so eh 2% ee 100 200 14180 9000 10210 +222 «133 «118 $3113 £1200 ae 20 86 se en 8% Be 200 : $1210 t Replacement and Depreciation average requirements » igured from se dy eo 00 0» RANGE AND PASTURE Taxes and interest Rent or fee 400 868 11850 11600 «733 «561 38696 $6509 SUPPLEVENTAL FEED Hay Concentrates Labor of feeding Feed for work animals $3970 $1064 & 290 81760 8767 5567 2750 12317 «453 «491 «105 »143 88 80 BO Be G9 es BF 50 40 00 36 BH Se 99 00 Pp Pe #0 48 ee "0 2% 40 ao ee 49 50 00 0% OF se we Se pe 80 ss We ae BO 0 se 48 BD 49 es se IMPROVEMENTS House Barn Lambing sheds Shearing sheds Fences Corrals Dipping Vats Watering improvements . 29 BO 20 BF 80 #0 ee 00 #0 as ae 2s ee WY Af 1337 : 8450 883 58767 315 5600 « '.058 3 138 : 2130 .063 664 : 12467 214 430 : 9950 . 043 54 : 3350 .016 302 7250 .041 22 3000 (.073) Troughs .158 a3 "ne oe * P08 20 es 9 be £6 7 BO Oe 0m Se Le Fp oO 0 #9 80 40 BY "0. 00 on BF be LE ET LE LE TJ EQUIPMENT Saddles Camp-pack-wagon, traller, etc: ® se 99 B29 ae .e Ee 171 : “11417 : 468 : 11417 : .015 .044 “0 ae PE ee . *e ee LAEOR Manager Book keeper Herding Camp tending Board Trailing Tagging Lamb, dock, mark Shearing and branding Dipping Work animals Auto use Dogs MARKETING Yool Lambs and mutton MISCELLANEOUS HANDLING COSTS Salt Sacks Twine Paint Dip Association fee EANCE IMPROVEMENT Predatory animal control Table II ae 00 #0 Be 0 88 58 #9 08 #0 28 98 te BE 80 09 48 2 eo .e LE -e “eo a» 1200 960 280 360 030 133 225 066 500 S 32 10 30 17 4 2 20 1C 20 0 oe BS 19 se 5% 00 ee SO 4% eo» Lf Se ED LP 5 G0 BD An OP Of 20 LF ee LL) on *'® 00 *e we 0 9 49 *e 40m fn "e £0 Ap Bi 7 £m Le oe $175664 636 9742 2495 3625 660 178 3279 2865 24 607 8087 136 431 408 480 R296 78 26 28 138 98 S09 SF 20 06 40 00 se WB BY 2e 0 98 se 00 a» 331: 12017 3550 14817 9600 12317 9542 4850 11707 12917 1250 13542 124867 13625 12467 7800 10217 12842 10642 121¢2 6017 118¢92 a8 *% 80 00 08 we We 4% 89 se OF SC oe a" se "9 00 20 se PO #0 se 85 23 92 69 85 61 69 ™ 85 92 77 92 77 54 69 22 92 92 3¢ 85 100 ee 40 86 00 90 48 8% AM ®0 59 8% #6 09 om 6% ae * "nn o 8 we TTTAXXX TOTAL COSTS RECEIPTS, Wool Tags Mutton Lambs TOTAL RECEIPTS NET Table II, conc. $7,998 23,280 $§ 39 34,800 $28,119 : § 121 + 884479 : 855847 :$53978 - :$101473 * +: 816994 :$ 5985 : ae 99 09 9% es ¢ 10817 13817 4067 10142 10817 10817 TABLE III Average Sogiz es Head for Ble Eig Classes of Operators into whigh Sheep Owners were Divided Dl Dg To Small-Early Sma 1ll-Late ILarge-Harly tarp Tats Smeall-Early omall-Late GENERAL he } Average Number of Shecp VUwned; 100 1166 ; 1103 ; 6260 ; 3706 $1218 + 706 Breed of Ewes 100 Merino ; ; Dele 9M 4¢R :llerino , s 7 Mer. 3 Ram;2 M 2 A ; Merino | Shi 4 Cross. ; Breed of Bucks : 100 2 Bh. LG%y ; 3 Remw -Heavy Merino ; 4 Mer. 1 Ram; 3H -1 Shrop. ; Sh. Cots.] 4 Hamp. Date of Lambing : Dec~-Jan. : Jan. to lias. Dec. + Jan. to Apre: Dec. Jan. : Jan.Xeb. I Feb.) Date of Selling Lambs :Mar. Apr.iay: July to Oct: Mar.Apr.lMay : June to Sept: lay : July.Aug. Weight of Lambs : 68 : 69 670f : 50 : 69F : 68iF : 10% : 75 Price per Pound : 10.- : 9¢ : 50 11 : 940 : 10 : 10 Price per Head : 6.08 3 De98 + 7450 : 6.25 : 7.08 ; 6.1 Number Produced : 986 s+ 008 . : 5,29] : 3,023 : 31,000 : 579 Wool-Pounds per Head : A0F + 100 OF : gif Re : oF : 81/3 Wool-Price per Pound : 34 : 100 384 : 40 : 39¢ 1: 36 : 43 Tags-Pounds per Head : - : - : - 3 #38 iF - - lags Price per Pound 4 - : - : - : 20¢ : - : - COSTS Flock Charges % J Yo % Interest on Flock : 67. iB : $605 $078 : $e 694 : 100 593 Interest on Working Capital:o7. $8 OE : e261 : 100 ".139 Taxes a nd Insurance 100. : 135 : 8 +185 3 100 . 084 Ram Service 100 : 88 ; ‘ : «152 : 100 - .160 LOS SES Predatory Animals 1 OF J : Pe od : +329 : 75 «194 Poisonous Plants s oF 3 é 3 . 198 : 100 « 236 Disease and Accident + 01 0 : H : «148 : 75 «378 RANGE AND PASTURE : : Tax and Interest, Rent or Pee: : : «2D : 5 4 : 2.520 1 100 1.929 Sup plemental Feed 1 38 vB B8 : Bb : 219 : 75 . 281 Hay Concentrates : $B : 8 4 : «269 Labor of Feeding : : : : : «043 + 2D7 . 091 J Az Sma 1ll-Late for ze-Barly TABLE III Head for the Eight Classes of E Operators Jpu. which Sheep Owners were Divided Bl o Lar ae-120e vl Small-Early Small-Late DT Large-darly x1 ve Large-Late 66 ino : Jel. he. . ; ; 1103 9M 4R 3 Re== 670% of 5.92 902 . 100 9if 69 : 100 38¢ 70 100 $605 69 .201 100 .138 69 ; «168 77 .222 61 .133 61 .118 Yq 85 1.254 54 .4b03 39 31191 15 .105 ’ ; 6250 :Merino s® 9 oo» Jan. to Ma®.: (Feb. ) Jdiay: July to Oet: 29 #9 #% s+» ee 8% + Deg. 50 50 7.50 5,291 gif 40 /0 100 100 50 100 50 00 50 0 2 sHeavy Merino + lar Apr May 69% 11 + 576 «202 «188 «210 «483 «250 «250 «566 «020 «040 3706 7 Mer. 4 Crogse 4 Hamp. Jan. to Apre: June to Sept: 9 Ge ks ’ 70 100 100 100 100 93 80 87 90 60 53 13 68iF + C 25 023 85 39¢ +38 # 20¢ se D94 P; 261 «125 «158 «529 «198 «148 2+ 530 219 «269 «043 . ’ + 4 Mere. 1 Ram; - 5 . 1212 % Ram;2 M 2 A 3H ~-1 Shrop. Dee. Jan. May 70% 10 7.02 1,009 ir 36 % 100 593 100 ".139 100 . 084 100 - 160 785 «194 100 +226 75 «378 100 1.929 75 «281 100 « 2D" 25 «091 se 2° 2% as ot Tr vs - er 9° 706 Merino * ’ 100 - 51%k8 ’ ’ 3 Ramb 4 He S.M; Sh. Cots.ler;li'(4NS) 1RM : Jan.¥ebs Mar: Dec. Jan. July.Aug.Sept: Apr. May 75 : OTF 10 t 107 6.19 : T.02 579 : 4,449 81/3 : OF 43 : 37¢ - sR - : 18¢ 7 J 100 4.582 :100 4.595 100 « 130 £100 . 085 83 «124 3.86 +119 50 «123 : 71 +121 34 «160 : 86 «0385 67 +156 : B% 034 100 2.233:100. 1.567 33 «19%: 71 168 50 «596: 71 «301 17 (356): - ; 100 4750 Shrop. Cr Shrop.Hamp. + 100° Jan-iebe. : 100 June : 100 . 100 : 100 : 100 100 75% 9d 6.25 100 4,065 100 8# Shrop. 100 41 Be 626 ¥: 250 «095 +156 100 100 .154 « 533 . 584 310) 50 Feed Work Anima ls Improvements House Barn Lambing Sheds Shearing Fences Corrals Dipping Vats Watering Improvements Equipment Saddles Camp Pack: Wagons Etc. Labor Managerial Bookkeeping Bexding Boayd =: iv: Camp Tending Lrailing Tagging Lamb Dock larls Shear Brand Dipping Work Animals Auto Use Dogs ® 20 OF 2% 90 80 o0 SP #6 80 ae eo 89 #4 oe 9% #9 9% 4% Pe S08 oF So oP ee 5% oe gol ae 8% o¢ 29 w% oe MARKEIVING Wool Lambs =nd Mutton Misc. Handling Costs. Salt Sacks Twine Paint Dip As'sn Fee ovements rons Etc. ls ston Costs. :s 100 : 83 87 67 67 : 100 : 100 100 100 100 100 100 9% @9 9% £0 5 100 100 oe oo FF sv #9» 100 +100 +100 : 67 :s 3d +100 +100 +100 +100 +100 Al «147 ae «150 «243 .092 «030 a9 S69 99 #9 SF Se 9 8 «010 «012 +0b3 : es 1.500 «120 «6563 «263 «169 «067 « 561 . 288 «050: «603 «014 es 8% wo gol oo eo 6 09 99 se O85 5s oF «030 : +017 : «029; +0221 «007: «007: L017: 85 61 47 Sl 15 nN? 61 2d 47 69 77 85 69 92 92 22 59 85 AR +143 +168 3 «13% «006 .063 «214 « 043 «016 «041 «015 «044 1.366 «179 «606 «294 «261 «069 « 037 Ce 279 « R22 «019 «045 oe 649 «010 «026 «062 . 047 «083 « 007 «008 « VOB ae S&F pe SF 2° eo 9% 96 9% oo ©F ss SF 8+ &» «016 50 Bl 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 50 50 50 50 100 100 50 50 100 50 2. «017 .028 . 006 «063 «006 «003 . 003 «016 «998 «0856 «854 «230 «018 «031 «163 «201 « 006 «2482 «009 .024 «016 «007 «002 «002 : 47 : 40 1 8d + 40 s 73 s+ 20 B2 ——— — «075 «075 «054 063 .014 «127 +015 . 006 «027 .010 «039 117 + 0b3 «834 «341 «321 «167 .079) «261 «181 ¢153) 2027 «360 . 009 .021 «156 «044 «027 « 006 «006 «005 «006 oe 9% se 8b *® 4% vo S8& oe" 8% +4 = 75 20 50 29 50 25 50 75 100 76 100 25 60 50 50 75 75 76 100 100 50 50 Cl 076 «025 «233 « 039 «049 » «292 «010 .015 «849 .083 1.276 «251 0543 .018 . 034 «273 «272 «019 «387 «007 .011 «019 .016 «019 . 006 «004 «016 +010 es 90 O00 oe o¢ #9 60 5° 5% oe 8% o9 oo ee 67 17 17% 17 83 C2 i? 33 33 17 +323 5" « 101 71 - : 43 020 1: 43 045 :: 43 «308 1: 100 +022 + 86 - : 43 +32F : MM all + Ti 084 ; B17 1.678 : 100 - 1 7 «489 1: 86 +134 _: 100 - 3 43 - 3 43 034 : 49 +.J94 : 86 +236 : B86 +013 : RY * 028 : 100 +453 1: 100 .019 : 100 286 : ‘71 * 412 : 29 «033 .016 :100 « 007 86 .003 : 86 « 031 57 «O19 + 11 D1 DR. .018: 100 .088 +173: BHO 4037 * 022: - « 061: - 026: 50 .020 «126: 100 .1l12 +017: 100 .005 «010: - «007: 100 .032 .003: 100 .006 .008: 50 .007 848 : 100 .757 083 : 50 .231 1.010 : 100 .455 .128 3: 100 .17% .148 : - - 086 : 50 .010 084 : BO .038 .181 : 100 .235 .236 : 100 .19% .065 : - - .062 :100 -015 170 :100 «106 «003 . &0 +002 .026 ¥ 50 «017 (.974) : 50 «033 .018 :100 «020 .020 :100 .020 . .006 :100 .008 .007 :100 .006 081 : 50 .001 «006 . 100 . 004 x11 RANGE IMPROVEMENTS Pred. Animal Control Total Costs Per Head RECEIPTS Wool Tags Pelts Mutton Lambs TOTAL RECEIPTS Net oF 90 so 00 9» 100 67 Al «010 : 7.395 : 34557 «035 5.568 ; 8«%761 : 1.366 : Bz «010: «010: 7.010: 93 7.920: 100 3.428: 100 3.350: 100 +076: «0569: 494: (40) (2,313) 4.620: 87 4,680: 8.230: 93 8.470: 1220 : 93 ' .5B0: «010: 3.390: 458: 5790 : 94530: 2,010: . 7.580: 100 100 o%7 S ontrol Al : 100 «010 : 67 7.395 ; Bg 557 «038 b.568 : 8.761 1.366 : + 50 548856::100 : 20 69 :100 5.520 :100 8.630 : +890 : 50 50 Bg 7.010: 93 7.920: 100 3.428: 100 3.350: 100 L076: «059: 494: (40) (2,313) 4.6280: 87 4,680: 8.280: 98 8.470; 1220 : 93 «550: D1 «010: 71 4009 7.769: 86 8.680 3.414: 100 3.164 . 064 .064 «967 44.580 i 4921 : 8.552 : 2160 «770: 86 Reb3:: ! TABLE IV x1iii ® Costs a Head Compiled from Averages in Table III Average fermitiees Non-Termitlees Early Lambing Late Lambing Small Operators Large Operator: COSTS Flock Charges Interest on Flock : $600 : 3.6 : «584 Interest on Working Capital: .182 : : «176 Taxes and Insurance 3 +121 : 3 : «098 Ram Service 3 +158 : : «140 Losses (636) : : (600) Predatory Animals 3 +255 : 2 : «171 Poisonous Plants : +188 : | 3 «191 Disease and #gcident : «198 : : «238 Depreciation Replacement RANGE AND PASTURE Tax and Interest, Rent or Fee SUPPLEMENTAL PEE Hay Concentrates Labor of Feeding Feed Work Animals TPROVELENTS House Barn Lambing Sheds Shearing fences Corrals Dipping Vats Watering Improvements oe 90 9° op» *" 9% 9 o> ee oo 5 oo 8 SF 9% 0° 59 S90 99 oe ° ® *® 9» oP" oo *® o0 OF 90 O° S09 90 ve EQUIPMENT Saddles Camp Pack Wagons, Etc. LABOR Managerial Bookkeeping Herding Camp Tending Board Trailing Tagging Lamb Dock liarls Shear Brand Dipping Jork Animals Auto Use 9 oo» oP 0% se +» eer O° TABLE IV xliv Average Permittees Non-Permittees Barly Late Lambing Small Operators large Operators Dogs ns «009 : «010 : + 008 : . 008 «010 : «012 : .006 MARKETING : | Wool : «022 Lid e025 . «020 . «022 «022 : «023 : +021 Lambs and Mutton : * 3 «O75 : : : *® oo» MISC. HANDLING COSTS Salt sacks Twine Pai nt Dip As'sn Fee « 031 «020 «036 : . «021 «022 : : «019 «007 : : .007 e006 : +0058 «005 «005 «010 . «010 eP S90 0% S* po SF 99 ov SPF 0 8? a» se ®0 00 09 99 9% op eo» *e RANGE IMPROVEMENTS Pred. Animal Control : +020 . is «010 TOTAL COSTS 3 7¢529 3 %.,1839 Per Head : : : RECEIPTS Wool 3 3 3Z.55b Tags Pelts : Mutton (1.078) Lambs : 3 DeO4AT TOTAL RECEIPTS : 8.535 Net 3 1.006 : ian Co EE a Adams, R. L. Barnes, Will C. Coffey, W. C, xlvi Bibliography Farm Management. McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York, 1921 Farm Management Notes for California. University of Cali fornia Press, 1921. The Results of a Survey to Determine the Cost of Producing Beef in Califor- nia. U, of C. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circular 281, 1924. and Jardine, James T. Livestock Produc- tion in the Eleven Far Western Range States. U.S.D.A. Report No. 110, 1916. Productive Sheep Husbandry. J. B. Lip- pincott Co. Philadelphia, 1918. The Sheep Industry from the Market 8 tan dpoint. Ill. Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir- cular 125, 1908. Commi ssioner of the General Land Office. Report to the Secretary of the Interior, 1923-1924. xlvii De Loach, R. J. and Phillips, H. H. Progressive Sheep Rals- ing. Armour and Company, 1918. Hall, Louis D., Simpson, F. M., and Doty, S. W. Methods and Cost of Marketing Livestock and Meats. VU. 8. D. A. Report No. 113, 191s. Bill, J. H. and Dadi sman, S. H. Wool Production for High School Students. Univ. of Wyoming Bul. Vol. 1. No. 2, 1922. Hislop, W. and Powell, C. E. Sheep Husbandry in the Pacific Northwest. Wash. State College Agr. Exp. Ste. Bul. 134, 1917. Holden, P. GC. A Bunch of Sheep on Every Farm. Inter- national Harvester Co., 1918. Holman, Geo. E. Statistics of Live Stock, Meat Produc- tion and Consumption, Prices, and Inter national Trade for Many Countries. U.S. D.A. Report No. 109, 1916. Iddings, E. J. The Management of Farm Flocks in Idaho. Univ. of lda. Agr. Ext. Bul, 96, 1917. Jones, J. M. Fattening Lamba. Agr. & Mech. Col. of Tex., Tex. Agr. Expt Sta. Bul. 186, 19156. Munns, Edw. N. The Forest Situation in California. Calif. State printing Office, 1923. xlviii Range and Pasture Management. John Wiley & Sons, N. Y. 1923. Native American Forage Plants. John Wiley & Sons, N. Y. 1924. A. Yearbook The Sheep Ihdustry. 1923. U.8.D.A. Bul. 259 What is Farm Management, by V., Spillman. 1912. U.S.D. A. 742. Production of Goats on Far Western Rangé. 1919. U.8.D. A. Bul. 1001 Relation of Land Tenure to the Use of the Arid Grazing Lands of the South- western States, by E. C. Wooton. 1922. U.S. D. A. Farmers' Bul. 576. Breeds of Sheep for the Farm. 1214, rev. 1923. U.S.D. A. Farmers' Bul. 798. The Sheep Tick and its Eradi- cation, by Dipping. 1917, rev. 1923. Fgrmdrs' Bul. 810. Equipment for Farm Sheep Ral s- ing. 1917, rev. 1920, 1922. U.S.D. As Farmers' Bul. 1099. Judging Sheep. 1921, rev. 1922. Farmers' Pul. 1134. Castrating and Docking Lambs. 1920, rev. 1923. U.S8.D.A. Farmers' Bul. 1167. Essentials of Animal Breed- ing. 1920, rev. 1924. U.S.D. A. Bul. 1172. Feeding Cottonseed Products to Livestock. 1920, rev. 1924. Farmers' Bul. 1181. "Raising Sheep on Temporary Pastures. 1221, rev. 1922. Bul. 1268. Sheep Killing Dogs, by M. W, Coll. 1922. Youngblood, B. and Cox, A. E. An Economic Study of a Typical Ranching Area on the Edwards Plateau of Texas. Agr. & Mech. Col. of Tex., Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 297, 1922. X 0 ® ¥ Oo Wo Oe oN, Oo XS Yo V., N v, @ PM-1 3%:"x4” PHOTOGRAPHIC MICROCOPY TARGET NBS 1010a ANSI/ISO #2 EQUIVALENT I 0 E02 2 = fli I 22 eB 80 LL ¢ 2 IZ . - mm—— i ———— bre — ll=2 2 his ns NY \ 7 NP PD & N yy \ Dy N\ > 2 > A Y . » NN 7 sp min TITTIES ITI IATA spa pansy | ; : ‘ : : ' i 4 A 3 { 3 ! { { dite hood an Hee adem vet mdr 8) JERR ee END OF TITLE