18 BULLETIN 588, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



therefore, approximately 27 acres of the combined types, or 21 

 acres of grama-grass type alone, will furnish 365 animal-days' feed 

 per year, for yearlings and above, over a period of years, provided 

 it is stocked at not more than one-half this rate during July, August, 

 September, and most of October. In case of prolonged drought, 

 supplemental feed will probably be necessary. Conditions resulting 

 from extremely prolonged drought should be met by some plan 

 similar to that suggested under prevention of losses, rather than by 

 greatly understocking over a period of years. 



UNFENCED RANGE. 



A rough classification was made of unfenced range 1 joining Pas- 

 ture 2 and similar in character. Of approximately 98,530 acres, 

 about 66,485 is grama-grass type, and the remainder of other range 

 types of less grazing value than the grama grass. The best infor- 

 mation available indicates that this area has been grazed by a yearly 

 average of about 3,750 head of cattle, yearlings and over, an aver- 

 age of 26.3 acres per head for all types. One acre of the grama-grass 

 range was estimated as equal' to 2J acres of the other types. On 

 this basis the total of 98,530 acres would be equivalent to 80,725 

 acres of grama grass, or an average of 21.53 acres per head. 



This range was considered overstocked at least 25 per cent for the 

 quantity of feed it produces, to say nothing of the absence of a chance 

 to recuperate. The estimated carrying capacity for the area as a 

 whole in its present condition, therefore, is about 35 acres per head, 

 and for the grama-grass type 27.9 acres per head. The estimated 

 carrying capacity of grama-grass range in Pasture 2 of the Reserve 

 is 20.76 acres per head, or 34.4 ,per cent greater than that of this 

 outside range of. similar character. 



In the discussion of range improvement by natural reseeding it 

 was shown that the total amount of vegetation on this outside range 

 is only 70.3 per cent of that in Pasture 2, and the good forage only 

 49 per cent, and the conclusion was drawn that Pasture 2 has in- 

 creased approximately 50 per cent in forage-producing capacity since 

 1913. This apparent discrepancy between the conclusion relative to 

 the two ranges based upon vegetation studies alone and that based 

 on the number of stock actually carried is accounted for by several 

 facts. First, the stock in Pasture 2 have been carried in good condi- 

 tion, and poor cows have actually improved during critical periods 

 of the year. Stock on the outside range have merely been carried 

 over, with some loss from starvation. Second, the estimates of sur- 

 plus feed in Pasture 2 were purposely low, and the estimates of over- 

 stocking on outside range were likewise low. Further, the data as 

 to number of stock on the outside range are estimates only. 



i The range here referred to is described under the chapter on range improvement by natural revegeta- 



