Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"<:t' <br />,~ <br />~ <br />.-l <br /> <br />field residue for 2 to 3 months, and upon dry feed for the remaining Sto <br />6 winter months. . Thus, irrigated. forage land and nonirrigated rangeland <br />complement each other in the producti.on of feed for range livestock. During <br />recent yeard, most of the beef ranchers, particularly in the upper reaches <br />of the .3asi.n. have. shifted to a cow-calf operation. Weather conditions in <br />the highslsvation areas are not conducive to winter feed lot fattening. <br />In the lower elevations of the Basin some beef fattening enterprises are <br />in operation, and there is an opportunity for an expansion of this type of <br />agriculture. Types of farming and location of presently irrigated areas <br />in the Basin are shown on the following map. <br /> <br />Currently, there are 239 Forest Service permits for cattle. Cattle number <br />39,518 head. and graze from June 15 to October 7, for a total of 147,968 <br />animal-unit months. Sheep ranches have 92 permits to graze 71,724 Sheep <br />from July 1 to September 15 for a total of 34,870 animal unit months. <br /> <br />Bureau of Land Management permits total 246 for cattle ranches headquartered <br />in the Basin, with 57,724 animal-unit months of grazing. Sheep permits <br />number 73 for ranches headquartered in the Basin, with 33,438 animal-unit <br />months of grazing, <br /> <br />Number of cattle, tans of all hay, and acres of irrigated pasture are a few <br />of the items presented in table 4 for census years 1944-59. Cows and heifers <br />that have calved increased steadily in numbers from 1944 to 1959, while hay <br />production remained fairly constant and irrigated pasture acreage increased <br />at about the same rate as the increase in numbers of cows and heifers, <br />Milk cows have decreased in number and in percent of total cows since 1944. <br />They are presently 11 percent of total cows, which indicates the beef cattle <br />operation is more profitable than dairying in the Gunnison River Basin. <br />No attempt was made to compile range sheep numbers because of the wide <br />variation due to different counting dates and the nomadic nature of sheep <br />operations. <br /> <br />Sale of farm products by source is another item shown in table 4. In com- <br />paring gross income from sale of farm products with gross value of crops <br />harvested, the difference is due, in part, to some of the feed crops being <br />used in livestock production, Sale of farm products also includes the <br />value made of irrigated pasture, nonirrigated range by livestock use and <br />value of forest products, In 1949 and 1959 it was mare profitablee to feed <br />the crops than to sell them, In 1944, sale of farm products was not enough <br />greater than value of crops harveSted to offset the additional inputs from <br />livestock feeding which resulted in a loss for cattlemen, In 1954, the <br />additional inputs from livestock feeding about offset the additional value <br />of farm products sold, over the value of crops harvested, As may be noted <br />in table 4, gross value of crops harvested per acre was highest in 1954 and <br />lowest in 1949 for the four census years, Fruit sales accounted for most <br />of the difference with price, rather than production, making the difference, <br />Relative prices for livestock were opposite to those of fruit in 1944, 1949 <br />and 1954. <br /> <br />Data to this point were compiled on a composite basis because of the size <br />of the Basin and because of the reconnaiSsance nature of the study, Haw- <br />ever, some detail on a per farm basis should be mentioned,. Number of farms <br /> <br />- 19 - <br />