While accounts of contemporary Historical Backgrounds of Range Land Use travelers are of great value in giv- ing us an appraisal of the general in nature of the forage cover at the time California was being settled L. T. BURCHAM they afford few details of its bo- Senior Forest Technician, Ccrlifomia Division of Forestry, tanical composition or floristic Sawamento, California. characteristics. It is to early bo- tanical collections that we must In the year 1769 a group of Pedro Fages said: “For flocks and turn for these details. They range Spaniards was riding northward herds there are excellent places all the way from fragmentary col- from , through the Coast with plenty of water and abun- lections such as those of the Ranges, in search of the Port of dance of pasture” (Fages, 1937). Beechey voyage to the more com- Monterey. Members of that party, At San Luis Obispo, he wrote, prehensive work of the Pacific an expedition led by Don Gaspar “Abundant water is found in every railroad surveys (Hooker and Ar- de Portola, were the first Euro- direction, and pasture for the cat- nott, 1841; Torrey, 1856). In a peans to gain any extensive, accu- tle, so that no matter how large sense early plant collections are rate knowledge of California. On the mission grows to be . . . the quite disappointing to a range Tuesday, July 18, 1769, one of land promises sustenance” (Fages, man. They were made almost these men, Miguel Costanso, wrote : 1937). But perhaps none of these wholly to serve taxonomic or other “The place where we halted was accounts excelled the simple elo- special purposes; they are chiefly exceedingly beautiful and pleasant, quence of Fray Juan Crespi, who records of occurrence, yielding but a valley remarkable for its size, wrote : “There is much land and meager information as to relative adorned with groves of trees, and good pasture” (Engelhardt, 1920), abundance and area1 distribution covered with the finest pasture . . .” of species. Nor do they ordinarily The Spaniards did not occupy (Constan&, 1911). Later, he said : include introduced plants which much of the Central Valley, or the “We then proceeded over high shortly had so profound an effect Sierra -Cascade country. hills, and through canyons contain- on the forage of some localities. The best early records of those re- ing very good soil and good pas- gions are in journals of American Historical Resum6 : The Livestock ture. . . .” These statements struck and Canadian fur trappers, who Industry of California a keynote that was echoed by early traveled here extensively after the Ranching had its beginning as travelers throughout California, first quarter of the nineteenth cen- the first industry in California in who uniformly were favorably im- tury. Jedediah Smith was inter- 1769 when the Franciscan mission- pressed with the potentialities of ested primarily in trapping bea- aries brought cattle and horses the country for livestock grazing. vers. But he observed that there from Lower California to the mis- The Pristine Ranges of C,alifornia was feed for his horses in the lower son being founded at San Diego. Early travelers in California San Joaquin Valley when he wrote, Provision for establishing a herd were, for the most part, sturdy, on February 12, 1828 : “The win- of livestock was an important ele- experienced, and practical men- ter in this valley is the best season ment in the founding of every mis- explorers, trappers, traders-who for grass . . . the whole face of the sion. Meat was necessary for sub- viewed the countryside with an country is a beautiful green, re- sistence of the mission community, eye to its ability to supply their sembling a flourishing wheat field” while hides and tallow furnished immediate needs, and with regard (Sullivan, 1934). In 1833, John raw materials essential in local to its potentialities for settlement. Work was marooned at Marysville economy. Long before the discov- A great many of them had reason Buttes by seasonal floods of Sac- ery of gold-even before cereals to give close attention to the for- ramento River, with a party of 163 planted by the colonists yielded de- age resource : either directly as a persons and some 400 horses. On pendable harvests-the forage on source of feed for the animals February 22 he noted: “We have the hills had begun to form the which transported and fed them; been a month here and could not basis of a reliable economy. or indirectly, as a possible means have fallen on a better place. . . . Additional settlements followed of livelihood through grazing of There was excellent feeding for San Diego in rapid succession. By livestock. t,he horses . . .” (Maloney, 1945). 1823 there was a chain of 21 mis- The Spaniards, whose activities Edwin Bryant described the coun- sions stretching from San Diego to were confined principally to the try southeast of Sacramento as a Sonoma; had been estab- region west of the San Joaquin level plain covered with luxuriant lished at four strategic spots along Valley and south of San Francisco, grasses, and said that in the bot- the coast. As colonizing agents of left ,voluminous records of their tom lands along Mokelumne River the Spanish government, missions first impressions of this country. the rich soil produced the finest were not intended to be permanent, Of the mission lands at San Diego, qualities of grasses (Bryant, 1848). nor was their establishment accom-

81 82 IJ. T. BURCHAM

panied by any conveyance of land Acquisition of California by the dead cattle by the hundreds” from the crown to the mission. United States occurred almost si- (Brewer, 1949). R’esults of this Under both Spanish and Mexican multaneously with the discovery of drought were so drastic that cattle governments missions were per- gold. Almost overnight a prodigi- production on a speculative basis mitted to occupy and use certain ous market for meat was created- was permanently curbed in Cal- lands for the benefit of the In- on the very doorstep of the Califor- ifornia. But it had beneficial as- dians : in theory, when the In- nia rancher. The spectacular live- pects ; many ranchers realized they dians had been Christianized and stock boom which marked the dec- no longer could depend solely on civilized mission settlements were ade that followed was a natural range feed for production of live- to become pueblos (towns) (Rob- outgrowth of the Gold Rush. The stock and began to plant alfalfa inson, 1948 ) . The missions soon seemingly insatiable demand for and other forage crops to supple- extended their occupation of land meat in mining camps, and in ment natural vegetation, thereby so that boundaries of one tended such mushrooming metropolitan laying a firmer foundation for the to coincide with the next, despite centers as San Francisco, Sacra- range industry. Many ranchers now the fact that much intervening mento and Stockton furnished the shifted their interest to sheep, be- land was not in actual use. Ulti- incentive. Ranchers sent their lieving these animals were better mately, missions asserted claim to stock to markets in northern Cal- suited to the semi-arid climatic a major part of all lands in the ifornia in drives comparable in eco- conditions. By 1870, cattle num- coastal strip from Sonoma south- nomic significance and picturesque bers had decreased to less than ward, embracing about one-sixth detail to those over the Abilene half a million head, while the sheep of the total area of the state. At Trail of (Cleland, 1941). population had risen above 2.7 its height this mission-dominated Nor could the demand for meat be million animals. pastoral empire probably con- satisfied by local production. Large As permanent settlement of the trolled in excess of 400,000 head herds were driven from Texas, state proceeded increased emphasis of cattle and 300,000 sheep (Gor- Mexico, and , was placed on farming, large don, 1883 ) . while more than 150,000 head of tracts of fertile valley land being Ranching was not a prerogative cattle entered the state from the diverted from range use to crop of the missions. Livestock soon Middle West during the years 1852 production. The pastoral industry were acquired by soldiers and set- and 1853 (Cleland, 1941; Samp- shifted to grassland and woodland tlers of the frontier establishment. son, 1952). ranges of the foothills, and to pla- In 1784, Governor Fages submit- In spite of the enormous demand teau and mountain areas not gen- ted to his superiors in Mexico the for meat, and of droughts which erally tillable, where it has become first petition concerning private created serious shortages of range relatively stabilized. use of land for ranching in Califor- feed during the late 1850’s, the Major Factors Affecting the nia; it came from one Juan Jose cattle population increased from Range Resource Dominguez “who was a soldier in about a quarter of a million ani- the of San Diego and who mals in 1850 to nearly one million Nearly two centuries of use have at this moment has four herds of head by 1860; sheep increased by vastly altered the range resource mares and about 200 head of cattle nearly 1.1 million head (U. S. Cen- of California from the pristine on the river below San Gabriel” sus Office, 1853 ; 1864). The higher condition seen by Spanish pioneers. (Cleland, 1941). At least thirty livestock population of the early What we see today is the result of concessions of land for ranching- 1860’s coincided with a marked interaction of many factors oper- nearly all to veterans-were made slackening in demand for meat ; ating during the course of our during the Spanish period, ending reduction in sales meant more range use history. In a situation in 1822 (Robinson, 1948). The breeding animals on the ranges- of this sort the effect of two un- Mexican government was more numbers soared tremendously. Gen- favorable factors is not the simple generous in its grants; but the erally accepted estimates place the arithmetic of one plus one equals land grant movement did not be- cattle population at three million two. When one adverse factor is come really active until after about head in 1862 (Cleland, 1941; Gor- added to another under circum- 1836. From then until the end of don, 1883). The next two years stances such as existed here there Mexican rule practically anyone brought the most critical period of is a cumulative effect that assumes could obtain a grant of a square drought in the history of the live- aspects of a geometric ratio. When league of land if he would put up stock industry in this state; great certain factors are singled out for a house and place a hundred cattle numbers of stock perished from individual inspection, this com- on it. More than 500 ranchos ex- lack of feed and water. William bined, cumulative effect must be isted in California in 1846; nearly Brewer wrote : “May 27 [1864] kept in mind. all had their origin in Mexican we came up the San Jose valley. Major factors affecting Califor- grants, mainly from former mis- . . . The drought is terrible. In nia’s range resource during the de- sion controlled lands (Robinson, this fertile valley . . . during the velopment of the livestock industry 1948). past few days’ ride we have seen have included limited precipita- HISTORY OF RANGE LAND USE IN CALIFORSIA 83

. Ten-yewmonny overage

FIGURE 1. Trends in seasonal precipitation on California range lands: 1849-50 to 1952-53, inclusire.

tion with irregular distribution, which may be influenced by selec- while there have been considerable seasonal and long-time variations tion of points between which the fluctuations of precipitation dur- in temperature, replacement of na- trend line is calculated. ing the past century they are r tive vegetation by introduced spe- An analysis of precipitation rec- rather evenly distributed about the cies, rates of stocking, changes in ords from stations located in the mean, and there has been no pro- size of grazing animals, nutritional primary range area of California, nounced trend in precipitation deficiencies in the forage, types covering more than a century, in- within the area, and during the and patterns of land ownership, dica,tes there has been no pro- time, included in this study. Fluc- changes in land use, and changes nounced trend in precipitation tuations of precipitation greater within the livestock industry it- (Fig. 1). All stations used in this than one standard deviation from self. Only a few of them can be analysis have records of 74 years the mean, plus or minus, indicate touched upon here. or longer; three of them extend a condition of surplus, or of defi- As a whole, California is an area back well over 100 years. The anal- ciency, throughout the primary of relatively low rainfall. “About ysis was based on “seasonal pre- range area of the state at the same 55 percent of all seasons yield less cipitation”-from July 1 through time; fluctuations of less than that rainfall than the average rainfall June 30 the following year. The amount were of lesser area1 extent. record” (Lynch, 1931). When sev- curves show seasonal precipitation While there has been no pro- eral such seasons follow one an- as a percentage of total precipita- nounced trend in precipitation in other, as has happened frequently, tion for the entire period of record, our primary range area during the difficulties arise for the stock- smoothed by use of a ten-year mov- past century, there is much evi- man. Deficiencies in precipitation ing average, as follows: for a sin- dence of wide variation in amounts plagued him almost from the mo- gle station (Fig. la) ; for three sta- received in different seasons. The ment of his arrival. They were es- tions with records of more than greatest deficiency to appear in the pecially severe from 1828 to 1830; 100 years (Fig. lb) ; and for records studied occurred during in 1840-41; and from 1845 through twenty stations in the grassland the twelve-year period from 1853- 1847 (Bryant, 1848 ; Lynch, 1931; and woodland range areas of the 54 through 1864-65. During eleven Wentworth, 1948). state (Fig. lc, solid line). Statis- of these seasons rainfall was below Gray (1934) demonstrated a tical analysis showed that the com- the mean, and in seven it was less downward trend in mean an- posite curve (Fig. lc) constitutes than the mean minus one standard nual precipitation for California a homogenous record for the entire deviation. This deficiency was sig- amounting to about eight inches period, despite the fact that data nificant in the major disruptions for the 80 years between 1850 and from a variable number of stations of the livestock industry occurring _. 1930. His conclusion is open to were used for seasons prior to at that time. question because his trend line is 1878-79, aad from all twenty sta- Today the herbaceous cover of based upon solution of a least tions after that time. From these the principal range lands of Cal- squares equation, the results of data the conclusion is reached that ifornia is dominated by annual 84 L. T. BURCHAM

plants, more than half of them spe- 1934). “It was most abundant be- phase of succession, marked espe- cies introduced from the Old tween 1845 and 1855, when hun- cially by grasses such as medusa- World (Talbot, et ccl., 1939). Ap- dreds of thousands of acres were head (Elymus caput-medusae) and parently replacement of native clothed with it thick as a meadow” barb goatgrass’ (Aegilops triunci- vegetation by introduced plants (Brewer, 1883). Black mustard alis) in the Sacramento Valley and began about the time the first (Brassica nigra) was an important Northern Coast Ranges, and by Spanish settlers arrived. Studies dominant over large areas at this dogtail (@ynosurus echinatus) in of plant remains in adobe bricks same time (Bryant, 1848 ; Cleland, northern Mendocino and Hum- used in construction of the oldest 1941). By the mid-1860’s wild oats boldt counties. portions of the earliest missions in- was fast disappearing (Bolander, It is significant that this histor- dicate introduced species such as 1866 ; Perkins, 1863). Wild oats ical sequence in dominance corre- annual bluegrass (Pea annua) , and mustard were succeeded by sponds to the descending scale of wall barley (Hordeum leporinum) , filaree, which increased in abun- annual plant successions on Cal- and ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) dance until about 1865 to 1870 ifornia range lands under differ- became abundant concurrently (Brewer, 1883) ; it was associated ent intensities of use. Wild oats, with the advent of settlers, while with bromegrasses (Bromus) , wild soft chess (Bromus mollis) , rip-gut red-stem filaree (Eroldium cicuta- barleys (Hordeum), and some of grass (Bromus rigidus), and bur rium ) , curly dock (Rumex cris- the weedier native annuals, such as clover (Medicalgo hispida) are typ- Pm, and prickly sow thistle nitgrass (Gastridium ventricosum) ical of the highest stage of suc- (Son&us asper) may have pre- (Bolander, 1866 ; Brewer, 1883). cession on ranges dominated by an- ceded Europeans (Hendry, 1931). The third phase in this succession nual plants; the intermediate stage C e r t a i n introduced annuals was marked by species of compara- is characterized by foxtail fescue achieved virtual dominance of tively little value for grazing: red (Pestuca megalura) , filaree and red range lands at various times. Wild brome (Bromus rubens), certain brome; the low stage is indicated oats (Awena fatua and A. barbafa) native and introduced wild barleys, by plants such as tarweed, silver first became generally widespread, and native broad-leaved weeds like hairgrass (A&-a caryophyyllea) , and and perhaps captured and main- tarweed (Hemixonia) and turkey turkey mullein (Sampson, 19’52). tained a hold on a larger territory mullein (Eremocarpus setigerus) ; Since this sequence of succession is than any other species. As early this phase first became distinct intimately related to condition and as 1833 wild oats was an impor- about 1900. At the present time productivity of the range it af- tant element in the plant cover of appreciable portions of our range I fords a clear indication of the fact large areas, including portions of lands are in this stage. In certain there has been a steady downward the San Joaquin Valley (Leonard, areas there is evidence of a fourth trend in the range resource. I

Newly elected officers of the American So&&y of Range Management at the Ninth Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado: Left to right, JOHN M. CROSS,Dire&x, Nanton, Alberta; J. D. “DANNY” FREEMAN,President, Prescott, Arizona; E. W. TISDALE,Vice President, Moscow, Idaho; LYMAN L. RICHWINE, Director, St. Anthony, Idaho. HISTORY OF RANGE LAND USE IX CALIFORNIA 85

In the early days, when livestock using the range during the past duction problems, are entering in was bought and sold by the head century. Spanish livestock were a big way a new, modern era of instead of by the pound, the stock- significantly smaller than modern high powered consumer promotion man placed emphasis on the num- animals. In 1837, at San Fran- for their products” (Hintz, 1954). ber of animals produced and cisco “fine fat bullocks, weighing The stoekman has come to a re- placed as many animals on his from four to five hundred pounds, alization that he is producing a range as he thought it would SUP- hide included, were purchased at commodity in a highly competitive port. The range was stocked with- five dollars each” (Belcher, 1843). age, and is preparing to meet the out sufficient margin for natural “Describing a herd of ‘large steers’ competition face to face. The tran- fluctuation of climatic factors. Evi- in 1861, Abel Sterns wrote, ‘The sition to this new promotional era dence of local overgrazing ap- cattle are large and fat [and] will has been preceded by a realization peared almost at the outset of weigh from six hundred to eight that the range resource is definite- stock raising in California. Horses h u n d r e d pounds’ ” (Cleland, ly limited in both quantity and belonging to some of the missions 1941). From this and similar evi- quality; by a growing awareness multiplied so rapidly that by 1815 dence the conclusion has been that this resource is renewable. It wholesale slaughter was necessary reached that until after about is accompanied by an increasing in order to save forage for cattle 1870-when they were supplanted consciousness that ownership of and sheep (Wentworth, 1948). by heavier, modern breeds-most land imposes responsibility for its This condition recurred a number of the cattle on California ranges stewardship. Much constructive of times before 1850; some mis- probably averaged about 600 work is being initiated to put sions kept men regularly employed pounds live weight. The same situ- range management on a practical to shoot wild horses grazing on ation obtained with regard to basis; to maintain and increase the their cattle ranges (Engelhardt, sheep, the common breeds “. . . productivity of range lands in our 1920 ; Sullivan, 1934 ; Wentworth, weighing from fifty-five to eighty state. The ranchers themselves are 1948). Actual data on rates of pounds at maturity” (Wentworth, in the forefront, making the major stocking the ranges, prior to about 1948). The significance of this fact contribution to these efforts. 1900, are quite sketchy. In the is that since the feed requirement early 1860’s a ranch east of Pa- of an animal is a function of body LITERATURE CITED ,- checo Pass contained nearly 50,000 weight these smaller animals re- BELCHER, SIR EDWARD. 1843. Narrative acres and ran 10,000 head of cattle quired appreciably less range for- of a voyage around the world, per- -not more than five acres per cow, age. The Spanish steer which av- formed in Her Majesty’s Ship SUL- for yearlong grazing ‘(Brewer, eraged 600 pounds live weight PHUR, during the years 1836-1842. 1949). In 1880, it was common be- would require only about 75 per- Henry Colburn, London. 2 ~01s. BIDWELL, JOHN. 1866. Annual address. lief among ranchers that the best cent of the feed needed by the Trans. Calif. State Agr. Sot. 1864- grazing lands of the San Joaquin l,OOO-pound animal of today (Guil- 65 : 202-213. plains required only ten acres per bert, et al., 1951). In practical ap- BOLANDER,HENR.Y N. 1866. The grasses animal unit per year; that seven plication, this means that a piece of the state. In: Appendix to jour- acres per head was a sufficient al- of range which was properly nals of Senate and Assembly, . . . of lowance for cattle in Humboldt stocked with 100 steers in 1855 the State of California. [1865-66.1 Vol. III: 131-145. and Mendocino counties; and that should carry only about 75 head BREWER, WILLIAM H. 1883. Pasture in 1955-assuming that the range as little as three acres per animal and forage plants. In: U. S. CENSUS unit per year was adequate on cer- has not deteriorated in the mean- OFFICE. Report on the productions tain range lands of Los Angeles while ! of agriculture . . . tenth census. Vol. County (Gordon, 1883). As late III: 959-964. Today the range livestock indus- 1949. Up and down California as 1900, practical stockmen in the -. try constitutes an important seg- in 1860-64. Ed. by F. P. Farquhar. Northern Coast Ranges believed ment in the agricultural activity of Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley. 581 their lands would sustain grazing the state. Our range lands have PP. when stocked at the rate of eight BRYANT, EDWIN. 1848. What I saw in significant economic acres per cow on a yearlong basis advantages California. D. Appleton and Co., Phil- over those of other areas. Whereas adelphia. 455 pp. 2d. ed. (Davy, 1902). But, as early as grazing regions of other states CLELAND, ROBERT G. 1941. The cattle 1863, certain members of the live- on a thousand hills. Huntington Li- stock industry were cognizant of must look largely to more distant markets, our rancher has within brary. San Marino, Calif. 327 pp. deterioration in range vegetation COSTANSO, MIGUEL. 1911. The PortoK and rightly ascribed the cause to the borders of his own state and expedition of 1769-1770. Ed. by F. J. relatively close at hand, a market overstocking (Bidwell, 1866 ; Per- Teggart. Publ. of the Acad. Pac. Coast History 2(4) : 161-327. kins, 1863). for all the livestock he can pro- duce. “The cattle and sheep in- DAW, JOSEPH BURTT. 1902. Stock ranges of northwestern California. U. A fact of some significance, not dustries of California steeped in S. Dept. Agr. Bur. Plant Ind. Bull. commonly taken into account, is tradition and for more than a cen- 12. 81 pp. the increase in size of livestock tury concerned chiefly with pro- ENGELHARIY~,ZEPHYRIN. 1920. San Diego 86 Ii T. BURCHAM

mission. James H. Barry Co., San HINTZ, HAMILTON L. 1954. Cattle, sheep SAMPSON, A. W. 1952. Range manage- Francisco. 358 pp. industries enter promotional era. The ment, principles and practices. John FAGES,PEDRO. 1937. A historical, polit- Sacramento Bee, Nov. 13, 1954: p. F-4. Wiley and Sons, New York. 570 pp. _ ical and natural description of Cali- HOOKER, SIR WIL~LIAM J. AND G. A. SULI*IVAN, M. S. 1934. The travels of f ornia. Trans. by H. I. Priestley. WALKER ARNOTT. 1841. The botany Jedediah Smith. The Fine Arts Press, Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley. 83 pp. of Capt. Beechey’s voyage. Henry G. Santa Ana, Calif. 195 pp. GORDON,CLARENCE. 1883. Report on Bohn, London. 485 pp. TAL~BOIP,M. W., H. H. BISW~ AND A. cattle, sheep, and swine supplementary LEONARD,ZENAS ’. 1934. Narrative of the L. HORMAY. 1939. Fluctuation in the to enumeration of livestock on farms adventures of Zenas Leonard, written annual vegetation of California. Ecol- in 1880. In: U. S. CENSUS OFFICE. by himself. Ed. by M. M. Quaife. ogy 20: 394-402. Report on the productions of agricul- Lakeside Press, Chicago. 278 pp. TORBEY, JOHN. 1856. Description of the ture . . , tenth census. Vol. III: 953- LYNCH, H. B. 1931. Rainfall and stream genera*1 botanical collections. II~ : U. 1116. run-off in southern California since 5. WAR DEPT. Reports of explora- GRAY, H. L. 1934. Long-period fluctua- 1769. Metropolitan Water Dist. of tions and surveys . . . from the Mis- tions of some meteorological elements Southern Calif., Los Angeles. 31 pp. sissippi River to the Pacific Ocean. in relation to California forest-fire MALONEY, A. B. [Editor.] 1945. The Vol. 4: 61-182. problems. U. S. Monthly Weather fur brigade to the Bonaventura. John U. S. CENSUS OFFICE. 1853. The seventh Rev. 62: 231-235. Work’s California expedition, 1832-33. census of the U. S.: 1850. Robert GUI~ERT, H. R., PAUL GERLAUGH AND Calif. Hist. Sot., San Francisco. 112 Armstrong. Washington, D. C. 1022 L. L. MADSEN. 1951. Recommended PP. PP. nutrient allowances for beef cattle. PERKINS, JAMES E. 1863. Sheep hus- -. 1864. Agriculture in the United Revised. National Research Council. bandry in California. Trans. Calif. States in 1860. U. S. Gov’t. Printing Washington, D. C. 45 pp. State Agr. Sot. 1863: 134-145. Office, Washington, D. C. 292 pp. HENDRY, G. W. 1931. The adobe brick ROBINSON, W. W. 1948. Land in Cali- WENTWORTH, EDWARD N. 1948. Amer- as a historical source. Agr. History fornia. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berke- ica’s sheep trails. State College 5(3) : 110-127. ley. 291 pp. Press, Ames, Iowa. 667 pp.

Barnes (1942) found that al- Quantitative Effects of Clipping Treatments though mid grasses decreased in yield under frequent clipping, the L on Five Range Grasses frequently clipped short grasses produced considerably more forage F. A. BRANSON than plots clipped at the end of the Assistant Professor, Morztana State College, Boxernan, grazing season during the two Mon$oma years of study. Newell and Keim (1947) found that of eight grasses only buffalograss gave a higher Maximum sustained yield is the Hendricks, 1951; and Albertson, yield during 5 years of study un- primary objective of management et aZ., 19’53) have found that with der frequent clipping. on forage producing areas but an increase in frequency and There is relatively little infor- much remains to be learned before amount of tissue removed by clip- mation in the literature on the ef- this objective can be attained. Val- ping there is a decrease in grass fects of clipping cm tillering in uable information has been pro- production. Most of the above perennial grasses. Probably the duced by clipping to simulate graz- studies were of mid and tall most basic study is that by Leopold ing. Most clipping studies have grasses. The responses of some (1949) who concluded that tiller- measured yields from plots or short grasses and mid grasses have ing is strongly influenced by auxin bunches of grass-in the study re- been somewhat different. Canfield diffusing from the apical meristem (1939) found that clipping black ported below an attempt was made and that removal of the apical to determine the responses of dif- grama resulted in decreased pro- meristem results in tiller forma- f erent treatments. duction each year for the lo-year tion in teosinte and barley. Simi- study. This was true even of the Review of Literature lar stimulation of axillary buds least intensive clipping treatment Several workers (Canfield, 1939 ; of crested wheatgrass has been re- which was removal of foliage to Weaver and Hougen, 1939; Stod- ported (Cook and Stoddart, 1953). two inches at the end of the grow- dart, 1946; Whitman and Helge- Carter and Law (1948) found son, 1946 ; Baker, Arthaud, Co- ing season. The most productive marked differences in abilities of nard and Newell, 1947 ; Blaisdell treatment for tobosa grass was to six perennial grasses to tiller when and P e c h a n e c, 1949 ; Kennedy, clip it to two inches at the end of subjected to three clipping intensi- 1950 ; S a m p s o n and Malmsten, the growing season or weekly to ties. Tall fescue and crested wheat- Q 11926; Holscher, 1945 ; Thaine and four inches in height. Lang and grass produced more tillers when