NUMERICAL INCREASE OF CATTLE 



Statistics indicate that the number of cattle rapidly increased 

 from decade to decade up to 1900. Since that time, it shows evi- 

 dence of having declined, altho the figures obtainable for this later 

 period are hardly comparable with those of the previous decade. 

 These facts are illustrated by Table i. It will be observed that the 

 number of cattle other than milch cows is approximately 60 percent 

 of the total number of cattle. 



TABI,E 1. CATTLE ON FARMS AND RANGES, 1867 TO 1912 1 



1U. S. Dept. of Agr., Yearbook 1910, p. 630. 



2 Abstract of the I2th Census, p. 238. 



3 Estimated. 



4Abstract of I3th Census, "Live Stock on Farms," p. 316. 

 5 Statistical Abstract of U. S., 1911, p. 155. 



Before passing this table, an explanation should be given for 

 the two sets of data for 1910. The Bureau of Animal Industry es- 

 timates the number of animals in the country on January i of each 

 year, and in 1910 this estimate was 69,000,000. While this number 

 is quite accurate, it is approximate, and so is not comparable with 

 the more carefully gathered census figures. The census report of 

 62,000,000 cattle, while accurate, is not comparable to previous cen- 

 sus reports, due to the time of year that the data were gathered. In 

 1900, the census was taken June i, while in 1910 it was taken April 

 15 a difference of six weeks at the season of the year when the 

 largest numbers of farm animals are born. The inaccuracy of di- 

 rectly comparing the 1910 census report with previous census fig- 

 ures is shown by the following statement made in an abstract from 

 the 1910 census report. After estimating that from five to six 

 million calves would have been born from April 15 to June I, 1910, 

 and that probably one or two million of the older cattle would have 

 been slaughtered or otherwise disposed of, the report continues: 

 "Instead, therefore, of a decrease in the total number of cattle 

 from 67,719,000 on June i, 1900, to 61,804,000 on April 15, 1910, 

 a decrease of not more than three million, and possibly not over 

 one million, would have resulted had the enumeration of 1910 



