The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-07-09

hu ultimately and In tina aggregate
the inoreAss will be greater than that
which Is likely 70 DO accomplished In
any other way. Tho problem for the
States and the National Government
It Is said, is to aid In the change by
( working out a system which will
make such agriculture profitable.
| In addition TO this increase In the
numbers OF farm stock. there 10 little
4 doubt that the carrying capacity of
/ the existing ranges can be greatly en-
larged. This has been demonstrated
in tho national forests where improv-
ed methods and regulation have In
creased the capacity OF many ranges
from 10 TO 80 per cent This process
should continue for at least ten years
more and should result IN building up
the carrying capacity of the national
forests as a whole by perhaps Is per
cent
Economy In Use of Forage
n similar control could be exer-
cisea over the public domain outside
OF the forests. II 10 estimated that the
oa pacity of these ranges could be in
creased about 30 per cent About
half OF this would result from the i'm
proveme Dt IN the range itself after
averstocking and premature grazing
were prevented and natural reseedfns
facilitated The remainder would fol-
tow water development, tho construo-
tion of fences and the Introduction of
methods OF handling stock which are
out Of the question az long a. tho Inn
proveuent of conditions ON the range
merely provides an incentive for new
MEN 10 crowd Ia and undo by over
stocking whatever good has been ac-
com piished. The carrying capacity
Of these ranges has greaz9 diminish
ed IN the past and under Tho present
system there IL no reason for auppos-
ing that II viii increase In the future.
Other factors. though OF less i'm
portanGe, that should tend to increase
the future production OF live stock.
are greater economy in the use Of
forage both on the range and on the
farm, the use OF more and higher
grade bulls and better management
OF the breeding animals through the
year. The last two. II Is said. offer the
possibility OF increasing the calf crop
i've or ten per cent nnd the average
weight of q two-year-oid steer per-
haps thirty pounds
Where winter feeding lis praoticed
II is believed that yearltng steer will
cost approximately $40 and n long"
t'wo-year-old $46. In the range sec
tons of tho Southwest on the other
MARIA Gus Ab1'N may bs GhAiRHHNNu az
from SIS TO $ia for a vearlinR and
from $50 to SOS for a two-year-old
With sheep there ia q similar varia-
tim In California the cost of pro-
ducing lamb is placed at s1.55, in
the Southwest at sra and In the
Northwest a. s1.s2, In considering
these figures II must be rernem hered
'ifat they all may be ma terially alter
ed by increasing or diminishing the
percentage ~ births IN the herds and
focks. BETTER methods, II Ia pointed
out, WIFI almost certainly increase the
calf and lamb crops and in this way
reduce the cost of production per
head
In estimating these costs the In
vesttgators charged against the stock
/ the market value, IN the vicinity, of
Ell the feed consumed In this way
the necessity Of considering the money
! invested IL land and equipment WINS
elinaated. but. on the other hand, al
lowing the ateck owner a proft on
the feed Increases somewhat the esti-
mated cost of producing animals Az
the owner might not get his profit on
the feed II he did not raise stock 10
utilize IT, the actual profits in stock
raising IRE probably somewhat creator
than tho difference between the mar
ket price of tho animals and the re-
ports estimates OF the coat of produc-
( ton.