EAiTGE MANAGEMENT ON THE NATIONAL EOKESTS. 33 



of the range and stock as a whole, except where the range of the 

 individual is clearly a distinct natural grazing unit. 



6. As a rule, the range lands are low in grazing capacity conv 

 pared with farm pastures. Consequently, the number of stock con- 

 trolled, rather than the acreage controlled per mile of fence, usually 

 decides whether the cost of fencing is warranted or not. The excep- 

 tions are fenced areas for holding beef stock while they are being 

 gathered, for pure-bred registered stock, for weaning calves, and for 

 saddle stock. 



It is obvious that these important factors can be incorporated in 

 the final plan of management only by looking ahead and working 

 out a comprehensive plan for the development and use of the range. 

 Otherwise a beef pasture, calf pasture, or individual fenced range 

 of to-morrow will interfere with segregation of breeding stock and 

 dry stock, or with divisions for proper seasons of grazing, or de- 

 ferred and rotation grazing next year or later. 



As a matter of fact, the features of management outlined in num- 

 bers 1, 2, and 3 are becoming more and more important and should 

 be given first consideration in working out plans for future control 

 and management of the range. To insure the incorporation of these 

 principles in the management of the range and stock on lands of low 

 grazing capacity necessitates management by comparatively large 

 units, otherwise the expense of the necessary control will be unwar- 

 ranted. 



On ranges within the National Forests the division of cattle range 

 into units should ordinarily be by watersheds, where practicable, in 

 order to take advantage of topographic features which will aid in 

 controlling the stock. Watersheds, however, are not always satis- 

 factory units. They may be too large or too small for effective man- 

 agement. It is difficult to define what too large or too small means 

 as regards acreage; for variation in altitude, in topography, in the 

 shape of the area, and in the' character of forage and cost of con- 

 trolling the stock are important. Ordinarily, however, a unit which 

 will support not more than 3,000 head nor less than 1,000 head of cat- 

 tle should be satisfactory. There will be individual units larger, and 

 some smaller, which clearly should be managed as units. 



Just where the division lines should be is often influenced by com- 

 munity interest. It is obvious that cooperation of permittees in the 

 handling of the stock and the range is necessary to successful range 

 management. So far as practicable, therefore, the cattle units should 

 be such as to group the stock by communities, so that it will be pos- 

 sible for the owners to organize into an effective, active stock associ^ 

 ation with unity of interests. This factor is of increasing importance 

 as range management becomes more intensive. The grouping of 

 community stock, therefore, in many cases may be of sufficient im- 

 111479°— Bull. 790—19 3 



