Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 55
New Patterns on
[and and Water
MODERNIZATION OF AGRICULTURE
A productive and efficient agriculture is one of the great strengths of
the United States. Applications of new knowledge and techniques
have made it possible to engage a steadily declining proportion of the
population in food and fiber production and, at the same time, in-
crease the quantity, quality, and variety of output.
The rising trend in farm production had its beginning in the late
1930's and early 1940's, as the national economy recovered from a
catastrophic depression and geared for war. It has yet to show signs
of slackening. In 1967, American farms turned out a volume of food
and fiber that exceeded by 3, percent the volume produced in 1950.
Trend toward Large Cropping Units
This increase in production seems all the more remarkable when the
circumstances are considered. From 1950 to 1967, the number of
farms in the nation dropped by about two and a half million. In order
to utilize the work potential of machines and offset rising costs of
labor and materials, commercial farmers have increased the size of
their operations. Farmers harvested 34 million fewer acres in 1967
than in 1950, and farm employment declined by 5 million persons in
the 1 7-year period. The small subsistence farm is rapidly passing out
55
OCR for page 56
56
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
of existence as older operators die or move. A major portion of the
abandoned acreage is in the eastern United States, lands once reclaimed
Tom the primitive forest. Thus, the area is now in various stages of re-
version to forest, and its wild fauna is changing accordingly.
The foregoing trends, accepted without further inquiry, sometimes
lead city dwellers to the specious conclusion that our agriculture is
undergoing a national decline. But it is the essence of economic and
technologic progress that a nation devote progressively less of its
activity to the production of basic necessities and more to endeavors
that make life more stimulating and enjoyable.
The 37 percent increase in agricultural yields in 17 years represents
an accomplishment strikingly different from the progress shown in our
historic development. Until early in this century, farm output in-
creased with the growth of population and with the expansion of that
population westward to bring new lands under the plow. In the decade
after 1870, a time when settlement of the West was in full swing, the
number of farms rose by half, and production showed a similar rise.
After 1880 the rate of establishment of new farms slowed somewhat
as the better lands were settled. In the 40 years it took for the num-
ber of farms to reach a maximum, the acreage in crops nearly doubled.
Expansion of cropland still was the principal means of increasing
agricultural yield, and the volume of crops for human use also nearly
doubled.
The recent major spurt in production came long after the peak of
are al expansion. In fact, with this growth has come a reduction in the
need for more cropland. Land so used dropped from 377 million
acres in 1950 to 342 million in 1967. During that period, farmers
over the nation withdrew from crops an acreage exceeding the land
area of New England. On the northern plains, farmers withdrew more
than 1 acre in 20, primarily in response to programs instituted to re-
duce grain surpluses. But the proportionate shrinkage has been sharp-
est in the South. There almost 1 acre in 4 has been converted from
cropping to other uses.
Causes and Effects
The extensive and rapid reduction in crop acreage has been effected
in several ways. In part it represents the withdrawal of whole farms
from agriculture, particularly those surrounding urban areas, and
many in submarginal areas. Some of the decrease can be attributed to
land-rationing programs the government has sponsored since 1950.
But much of it stems from the discovery by farmers that, within
OCR for page 57
New Patterns on Land and Water
57
broad limits, it is more economical to increase yields through im-
proved methods than to cultivate more land for the same amount of
product.
In the 1 7-year period, crop production per acre rose nationally by
nearly 50 percent and in some parts of the South by about 100 per-
cent. Such changes have been the basis for predictions that by 1980
we can readily supply our sharply increasing domestic requirement for
farm products and increase exports moderately with even further re-
ductions in our cropland base.
The advent of the tractor and other motor-driven equipment re-
leased millions of acres of land that had been used in producing feed
for horses and mules. Between 1930 and 1967, land used for this pur-
pose was reduced from 65 million acres to 4 million acres (Economic
Research Service, 1 968a). Thus, an area equivalent to 80 percent of
the cultivated land in the Corn Belt was added to land available for
producing human food. Indirectly, availability of this acreage made it
possible for managers to assign less intensive uses to marginal lands
that previously had been cultivated.
The ability of agriculture to achieve striking improvements in pro-
ductivity while constantly yielding part of its land to nonfarm uses
suggests that the structure of the industry has been substantially
changed. The change has evolved as a response to the persistent pres-
sures that accompany national economic expansion. That it has been
healthy for segments of the industry is evidenced by the increased
size of the average farm. Today's "average farmer" operates a farm
twice the size of the one run by his 1940 counterpart.
Expansion of farm enterprises has long been a characteristic of
American agriculture. In the days when labor was a major component
of farm input, farmers expanded their operations as new tools, better
horse-drawn equipment, and new methods slowly improved the work
capacity of labor. Although the largest gains in acreage per farm have
occurred since the advent of the tractor, a national trend to larger
management units was well under way by the turn of the century. The
trend continued in the North and West even as the number of farms
was pushed higher by the establishment of new farms. Prevalence of
the sharecropper system in the South delayed by several decades the
beginning of the trend in that region. But since 1940 southern farms
have displayed a spectacular gain in acreage. Changes in the economic
pattern have been accompanied by major changes in the ecological
pattern on the land. Poorly managed "patch farming" produced ex-
cellent quail habitat and a colorful kind of hunting; unfortunately,
OCR for page 58
58
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
the larger modernized agricultural unit does not do so well for wild-
life by-products.
Generally, when small farms are converted into large management
units, wildlife habitat deteriorates drastically (see Chapter 41. This
deterioration undoubtedly has occurred on a broad scale. Early tabu-
lations from the 1964 Census of Agriculture indicate that about three
fourths of the 2.2 million loss in number of farms occurred among
units of less than l DO acres. In fact, more than half the farms that
disappeared were less than 50 acres.
Ownership and Tenancy
The American agricultural "revolution" has featured not only a major
overhauling of the land-use pattern and a shift to mechanization but
also a significant change in the tenure of farm operators. By 1959,
about 80 percent of all farms were operated by owners and part
owners, in comparison with only 57 percent in 1935. Between 1935
and 1959, the proportion of all farms worked by tenants declined
from 42 percent to- less than 20 percent. In the South, the proportion
of farms operated by sharecroppers changed from 10.5 percent in 1935
to slightly more than 3 percent in 1959 (Economic Research Service,
1 966).
Who owns and manages the land has important implications in the
long-term outlook for soil and water conservation as well as for other
values not associated with immediate returns. There is little incentive
for a sharecropper or tenant to invest his efforts in management for
the future or to consider a by-product such as wildlife. There is, in-
stead, a real incentive to emphasize practices promising the greatest
income in the shortest time.
An increase in the proportion of owners and operators of farms
means generally greater attention to scientific methods. However, the
end result is likely to be a specialized, more intensive land use, and this
is largely inimical to the kind of management that benefits wildlife.
That this is not true of all types of agriculture is evident from Chap-
ter4.
I m pacts of Change
Combined effects of the foregoing trends appear to be promoting
specialization in agricultural production. Sharp differences in cropping
systems are developing, even within long-established production areas.
To exploit their available resources, farmers are making not less than
three kinds of major organizational adjustments:
OCR for page 59
New Patterns on Land and Water
59
(1 ) Crop production is being shifted to areas of expansive, level,
productive soils that lend themselves to mechanization and to inten-
sive use of fertilizers and other chemicals. (2) Within these areas,
farmers with a suitable land base are confining their attention increas-
ingly to a few regionally adapted crops. (3) Location shifts accom-
panied by specialization make it possible to exploit the capacities of
costly field equipment and frequently to achieve a higher degree of
efficiency than is possible with a more diversified operation on less
productive soils. When supplementary enterprises are reduced, it is
often the livestock group that is dropped.
These reorganizations are resulting in major changes in the cropping
pattern and the agricultural landscape-changes that significantly
affect the potential for recreation benefits. Improved land manage-
ment and greater industrial values reduce the economic position of
wildlife, which, in most cases, depends in part on the presence of
uncropped areas and semipermanent types of vegetation (see Chapter
41. These essentials of the wildlife habitat are being wiped out by the
efficient technology that is taking over our best soils.
Trends in drainage are a case in point: Excess water is a problem on
much cropland in the humid part of the country. Nationally, about
1 12 million acres need further artificial drainage for maximum agri-
cultural use (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 19651. Half of this
acreage lies in the Corn Belt and the lower Mississippi Valley, two
major areas where the rapid shift to large-scale cropping is occurring.
The alluvial and glacial soils are pocketed with sloughs, potholes, and
other wet depressions, which provide excellent wildlife habitat but
commonly are an agricultural liability (Chapter 51-. Some of the
earlier attempts at drainage left spoilbank barriers or resulted in ir-
regularly shaped fields poorly adapted to the use of multirow equip
ment.
Land grading for improved drainage and the removal of surface
irregularities is increasing. Artificial reshaping to a constant slope, a
practice originating in the arid West as an aid to irrigation, is now
used in humid areas. The Soil Conservation Service provides techni-
cal assistance in land forming and by 1966 had contributed to these
practices on 13.6 million acres. Of this total, 190,000 acres was classi-
fied as drainage land grading, requiring detailed engineering survey and
layout; 8.6 million acres as irrigation land leveling; and 4.9 million
acres as land smoothing or rough grading to remove irregularities.
As part of the readjustments in land use, livestock operations are
becoming more specialized. In the Corn Belt fewer farmers feed
cattle and hogs, and the average size of such enterprises is increasing.
OCR for page 60
60
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
Poultry production (non-land-based) is being shifted to sites of low
agricultural value. Cotton raising is moving (as fast as artificial
restraints permit) to irrigated areas in the Southwest and California.
In the three Delta states this crop is being shifted from small hill
farms to the level fertile soils of the Delta proper. Even more corn is
being raised in the Corn Belt; this region has increased its proportion-
ate share of the national crop by a third since 1950. While the north-
ern plains area is still dominant in wheat, production is increasing on
the southern plains. The great advantages of mechanization and irri-
gation in vegetable production have caused a concentration of these
crops in the California Central Valley and level lands in the south-
eastern states. The pasturing of livestock is declining in the Corn
Belt, the Lake States, and the Northeast, and is gravitating to range-
lands of the South and West. The largest percentage gains in live-
stock production have been in the Delta and southeastern states.
All these trends have added to agricultural efficiency and yields.
The land-use picture is one of a highly technical and specialized food
and fiber industry taking over almost exclusive use of the most
fertile and productive lands of the continent. Correspondingly,
marginal farming is on the decline, thus making way for uses more
compatible with land capabilities and public demand. Where such
areas are not pre-empted for human occupancy, wildlife, forests,
and recreation are likely to improve their standing as social and
economic benefits.
Federally financed programs dealing with soil and water conserva-
tion problems on a national scale have profoundly influenced prac-
tices and attitudes as they relate to land use. Extensive knowledge of
land capabilities, collected over the past three decades, serves as a
guide in determining the wisest and most profitable use for a given
tract of land. In addition, there has developed a conservation con-
sciousness in both farm and nonfarm people to a degree unknown
before.
Gains and Losses in the Agricultural Base
Our uses of land have by no means adjusted fully to the agricultural
potential, nor are they likely to do so. Charles E. Kellogg has esti-
mated (unpublished data) that we have some 50 million acres of soil
used for crops-or with an official cropping history that makes them
eligible for crop uses-that are not suitable for farming under any
known combination of practices. On the other hand, about 230
OCR for page 61
New Patterns on Land and Water
61
million acres of soils (leaving out temporarily idle areas, federal lands,
highways, and urban sites) suitable for cropping are not so used. Most
of this land has a cover of brush, trees, or grass.
Despite the striking decline of land in farms, cropland acreage, and
number of farms, a substantial acreage of new land is being brought
into cultivation through drainage and irrigation and in other ways.
Eight states have increased their cropland harvested up to 1965: Dela-
ware, to which vegetable production has shifted as urbanization has
taken over cropland in other states; Florida, where drainage and irriga-
tion have brought large acreages into sugarcane, citrus, melons, and
tomatoes; Arkansas, which reflects the effects of drainage and clearing
of Mississippi Delta alluvial land; and Montana, Idaho, Arizona,
Nevada, and Washington, where irrigation developments have brought
about net increases in cropland. In total, these eight states added to
their cropland harvested by 1.9 million acres; the total decrease in
the 48 contiguous states was about 43 million acres.
In view of the fact that major problems of American agriculture
are associated with surpluses, adding new land is open to question.
This is especially true since the most readily available land has been
taken up, and today the reclamation of more desert, swamp, and low
forest lands is a high-cost enterprise. Also, it is frequently destructive
of outdoor recreational environments and wildlife. Although pressing
need for human food worldwide may eventually require that more
lands be brought into this type of production, there should be a
more careful weighing of costs and values than in the past.
He w Cro plands by Irriga lion
The availability of irrigation water makes cropping possible on the
highly mineralized soils of the arid West, and it supplements rainfall
on many areas in the humid eastern states. In rice culture, irrigation is
a routine requirement for profitable yields.
Irrigated land on farms throughout the United States totaled more
than 37 million acres in 1964. Seventeen western states accounted for
more than 33 million acres. Nationwide, land under irrigation is now
increasing at the rate of 780,000 acres annually, and in the period
1949 to 1964, western states accounted for 80 percent of the increase.
The total area of irrigated land is now approximately 40 million acres.
Changes in irrigated acreage are uneven within regions and within
time periods because of variations in availability of water, the amount
of rainfall, and demand for products. Although irrigated acreage in
the West increased by 6.5 million acres during a recent 10-year period,
OCR for page 62
62
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
acreage decreased substantially in three of the states because of a
shortage of surface water. In the Delta states, restrictions on rice
acreage resulted in a decrease of total acreage irrigated, despite a
marked increase in irrigation of cotton and soybeans.
A survey by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (1965) appraised
irrigation potentials based on the limiting factors of soil suitability and
the availability of water within watersheds as planning units. It ap-
peared that 66.9 million acres of cropland and pasture (slightly more
than double the 33.2 million acres estimated by the Bureau of the
Census to have been irrigated in 1959) would benefit from additional
water.
Although there has been a steady increase in irrigation, much of the
land already was in crop production, particularly in the humid East.
But much of the 9-million-acre increase in land irrigated between
1950 and 1965 in the 17 western states also comprised land previ-
ously cropped under dry-land conditions. In the most arid states-New
Mexico, Arizona, Utah, and Nevada-the irrigated area increased from
2.7 to 3.0 million acres between 1950 and 1965, and most of this
represents "new" cropland.
From the standpoint of wildlife relationships, it is of interest to
note that 51 percent of the irrigated cropland in the West is used for
the production of livestock feed. In addition, more than 5 million
irrigated acres in the region are in pasture or other nonharvested
crops (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1 962b).
About 56 percent of the irrigation water in the West is from
streamflow, representing an annual withdrawal of some 120 million
acre-feet (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1 962a). Major impound-
ments help provide this large volume of water, and nearly complete
use is being made of streamflow in some of the older irrigation areas;
yet the search for new sources continues.
The wildlife species most notably associated with western irrigated
land from the latitude of Colorado northward is the ringneck pheas-
ant (Hart et al., 1956; Yeager et al., 19561. This Asian gamebird was
first naturalized in North America in the Willamette Valley of Oregon
and has since shown its outstanding capabilities to survive in the
presence of various types of intensive hay and grain agriculture. With-
out question, irrigation has been the key to pheasant productivity in
many valleys of the West.
Where riparian lands are converted to intensive agriculture and
settlements, the wildlife that inhabits native ranges is largely elimi-
nated. In various western states such species might be deer, elk,
OCR for page 63
New Patterns on Land and Water
pronghorns, javelins, Gambel quail, and white-winged doves. In
decades to come, major changes in western fauna may be expected if
extensive water developments are carried out on the scale envisioned
by Senator McGee of Wyoming (19601:
63
Even with transpiration, evaporation, comsumption, and seepage into impervious
aquifers, three-fourths of the water of our western rivers still discharges into the
ocean. This means that the West has only begun to use its water. The Bureau of
Reclamation, in its report to the committee tSenate Select Committee on Water
Resources], states, "The amount of physically feasible water resource develop-
ment remaining in the seventeen reclamation states is enormous."
Their report summarizes 1,085 reclamation projects, both public and private,
upon which construction has not yet been undertaken.
The bureau estimates that 75 percent of the federal projects and 90 percent
of the non-federal projects listed can be developed by the year 2000. Such a
program would provide for the irrigation of 17 million acres of new land equiva-
lent. It should pour over 4 million kilowatts of hydropower into our transmission
systems. It would cost $22 billion.
Plans for these major works involve the possibilities for weather
control (especially cloud seeding) and transmountain river diversions.
In the face of a prospective near-total mechanization of the hydrology
and, indeed, the entire human environment, the position of wildlife
probably has relevance as only one of an entire spectrum of outdoor
resources requiring space and a (somewhat) natural scene. Such frag-
ile amenities will take their place in planning insofar as the total
ecological picture of defined goals and human population relation-
ships is given critical and realistic consideration. This kind of policy
appears to be extremely slow in developing.
Added Acres through Drainage
In common with irrigation, drainage has been an important means of
bringing more land into crop production. Compilations of the Agri-
cultural Research Service indicate that nearly 100 million acres of
agricultural land had been "reclaimed" by drainage by 1960-more
than 3 times the area made available by irrigation. In the United
States there are still some 172.5 million acres of level, or nearly level,
land that need group drainage outlets if they are to be used efficiently
for cropping (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 19651. Almost two
thirds of the acreage in watershed projects that would be feasible to
drain for farming is in the eastern third of the country. Currently, the
greatest area of development of new cropland through drainage is on
the alluvial land of the Mississippi Delta, where almost a million acres
OCR for page 64
64
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
were added between 1959 and 1964. Some new areas also are being
developed on the southern coastal plain.
In the humid eastern half of the United States, it has been common
practice to invoke the authorities of local drainage districts to dredge
the outlets of natural lakes to expose areas of organic soil for cultiva-
tion. Through the same process, marshes large and small have pro-
gressively disappeared. Extensive drainage projects helped to create
some of the nation's most valuable croplands Parts of Indiana's famous
Kankakee region exemplify this, as do Michigan's lake plains and the
Black Swamp area of northwestern Ohio. Often such enterprises were
speculative and failed as a result of poorly understood conditions, as
in the case of Wisconsin's Horicon Marsh and Georgia's Okefenokee
Swamp. Both of these "failures" are now dedicated to wildlife refuges.
Drainage on lands already in cultivation must be continued for rea-
sons of efficiency. This type of drainage is not to be judged by effects
on wildlife, although frequently the benefits to one species may bal-
ance the disadvantages to another.
There is perhaps no other phase of land use where wildlife relation-
ships are more clearly and more extensively influenced favorably or un-
favorably than in drainage for the conversion of "idle" wet areas to
agriculture. Nor has there been any other comparable area of disagree-
ment between agricultural interests and the proponents of wildlife
conservation. This is particularly true of government-sponsored, tax-
supported drainage that in recent decades was in the anomalous posi-
tion of contributing to the production of surplus, price-supported
grains, while at the same time reducing a wildlife resource (especially
waterfowl) for which there was unlimited demand. Historically, this
process has gone ahead as though no valid reason existed for preserv-
ing lakes, marshes, swamps, and other wet sites if these could be made
to support any kind of cropping enterprise. Minnesota's legal basis for
drainage exemplifies such statutes as described by Haik (19571:
A typical law authorized the "County Board to establish any ditch, drain, or other
water course, which ditch could in whole or part follow and consist of the bed of
any stream, creek, or river, whether navigable or not, or any lake, whether
meandered or not, and the Board could widen, deepen, straighten, change, lower,
or drain the channel or bed of any creek, river, lake or other water course...."
The authority granted by the legislature was very broad and was apparently
based upon a policy that considered surface waters to be a common enemy which
could be disposed of even if it meant taking property against a landowner's will in
condemnation proceeding.
OCR for page 65
New Patterns on Land and Water
65
The validity of such laws was upheld in the courts, and in one opinion
it was stated that:
As a rule, drainage proceedings are begun for the sole purpose of reclaiming wet
lands, primarily for the direct benefit of the owners thereof, and incidentally for
the promotion of the public welfare by increasing the productiveness and taxable
value of lands having little or no value unless drained.
In drainage statistics there usually is no reliable indication of true re-
lationships of costs to benefits, or identification of ecological effects of
one kind or another. Thus, the recorded acreages are only an index of
the scale on which such operations have been carried out. Commonly
the scale is broad, as the Wisconsin Conservation Department found in
a survey and evaluation of wetlands in 1954. Files of the State Drain-
age Engineer showed that from 1906 to 1940 more than 900,000 acres
had been involved in organized drainage (Dahlen and Thompson, 19551.
Beginning in 1941, farm drainage was subsidized at the rate of 6 cents per cubic
yard of earth moved and 40 cents per rod of tile put down. By the end of 1953,
when this subsidization was withdrawn, payments had been made to one out of
every four farms in the state, affecting the drainage of 1,692,750 acres.... Com-
bining these figures, we arrive at a total of over two and one-half million acres, or
4,075 square miles.
The authors noted that these operations did not always destroy wet-
lands as wildlife habitat and that some projects were abandoned. How-
ever, more detailed work in Racine County indicated that only 10,000
acres of wetland remained-a loss of 87 percent of the wetlands in 50
years.
One obvious result of drainage is the loss of deep marshes, which are so important
to waterfowl. With the exception of refuges and marshes along lakes or rivers,
hardly an area remains in Racine County which could be called good for duck
production....
An advantage recently gained for wildlife interests was the revision of Chapter
88 of the Wisconsin Statutes, the Farm Drainage Law. This revision requires that
the Conservation Department be notified of hearings concerning proposed drain-
age projects. In many instances the benefits to be derived from drainage are of
less consequence than the detrimental effects of lowered ground water levels,
loss of fish habitat in the outlet stream from siltation and warming, and the
possible increase of flood danger due to acceleration of run-off. In cases con-
cerning navigable waters, the Public Service Commission may be called upon
to determine whether the proposed drainage is in the best interests of the public.
OCR for page 81
New Patterns on Land and Water
The D isappearing G rasslands
81
On this continent, as in other parts of the world, semiarid grasslands
have been particularly vulnerable to deterioration under regimes of
heavy grazing or grain cropping. Darling ( 1956) has pointed out that
truly nomadic peoples, such as the "Reindeer Lapps and western Asi-
atic tribes," have used their extensive pasturelands in a manner similar
to naturally adjusted herds of wild ungulates. In comparison, the more
intensive exploitation of sedentary cultures has not been ecologically
attuned and handled within the limits set by climatic extremes. In
North America we probably have no grassland of any appreciable size
that is exactly as it was in primitive times. At the least, it has been in-
vaded by numerous species of exotic plants.
According to that epochal work The Western Range (Forest Service,
1936), the tall grass of the prairie has decreased more than any other
range vegetation. Originally this subclimax grassland extended as the
"prairie peninsula" eastward into Indiana with outliers to central Ohio.
In all, it covered some 252 million acres. Westward, conditions became
steadily drier, and in eastern Nebraska the mid-grasses of the true prai-
rie became dominant; these, in turn, gave way largely to short grasses
on the high plains.
Today some of the most fertile farms of North America occupy the
tall grass country. A suggestion of what this rich flora was like may
still be seen in old cemeteries and along railway rights-of-way in the
Midwest. Native prairies, as modified by heavy grazing, still exist in
blocks of some thousands of acres in the Nebraska Sandhills and the
Flint Hills of eastern Kansas. These soils are obviously unsuited for
cultivation.
Large marshes of the northern prairies once were nesting grounds
for the whooping crane, greater sandhill crane, and trumpeter swan.
Prairie chickens occupied nearly all the tall and mixed grasslands, habi-
tats that were lost progressively as the native sod was broken. The
heath hen of the east coast barrens had disappeared from most of the
mainland a century ago and became extinct in the early 1 930's. Other
prairie chickens now are greatly reduced and on the endangered list.
Probably the tall grass prairies were optimum range, at least for the
greater prairie chicken, but today the bulk of remaining habitat is in
the mixed grass region, where the land is too sandy or hilly to farm.
Other components of the grassland fauna have been decimated. The
bison and wolf are gone, and the pronghorn is largely restricted to
intermountain grasslands and brushlands. The huge flights of eskimo
OCR for page 82
82
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
curlews that migrated northward in spring across the prairies disap-
peared late in the nineteenth century as a result of unrestricted shoot-
ing, and the species may well be extinct. Extensive control operations
and the breaking up of grasslands led to widespread decline of the
black-tailed prairie dog and also its most dependent predator, the never
abundant black-footed ferret. Efforts are being made by the National
Park Service, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, and others to
preserve the ferret and its prey as part of the quasiprimitive ecosystem
in parks and natural areas.
The Gulf coastal prairie, including the part in Texas that supports
remaining populations of the endemic and endangered Attwater prairie
chicken, is undergoing extensive conversion to agriculture (especially
grain sorghum and cotton) and grazing.
Lehmann's ( 1 941 ) early surveys of the Attwater prairie chicken
indicated that the area it occupied in Texas in 1937 totaled less than
half a million acres, as compared with an original range of some 6 mil-
lion acres of coastal bluestem (Andropogorl) prairie. He also considered
the encroachment of mesquite, live oak, various acacias, and other
kinds of brush (held in check by prairie fires in earlier times) to be an
important factor in degrading habitat. He believed that overgrazing, es-
pecially during drought years, speeded the transformation of grassland
into brush jungles. By 1936 more than 2 million acres of former prairie
chicken range were in cultivation, and thousands of acres of sod were
being plowed annually, especially to extend rice farming. Pasture mow-
ing, oil development, drainage, overhunting, and uncontrolled pasture
burning were other factors listed as detrimental.
The Attwater prairie chicken once was common from southwestern
Louisiana southward to the Nueces River in Texas. It had disappeared
from Louisiana by about 1919 (Lehmann, 1968), and the total re-
maining population numbered about 8,700 birds in 1939. Another
survey by Lehmann in 1967 revealed that in 30 years the regularly oc-
cupied habitat had shrunk to less than a quarter of a million acres, and
the population had declined to about 1,070 birds.
Lehmann pointed out, however, that conditions are not hopeless for
this species, and efforts on its behalf exemplify the possibilities in co-
operation among agencies. Texas still has a "seed stock" and more than
a million acres that can support more of these birds. Public interest in
restoration is high. On Ellington Air Force Base a population of more
than 100 chickens represents a hazard to air traffic; the Texas Parks
and Wildlife Department and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wild-
life are transplanting these to vacant ranges. The World Wildlife Fund
OCR for page 83
New Patterns on Land and Water
83
purchased 3,400 acres in the heart of the important prairie chicken
range in Colorado County in 1965. In 1967, by a gift of Mr. and Mrs.
J. M. Tatton of Corpus Christi, 7,000 acres were added to the Aransas
National Wildlife Refuge. With technical guidance available, some land-
owners are willing to manage these birds at their own expense. To this
end, renewed research efforts are now under way
The Attwater prairie chicken program illustrates the kind of or-
ganized effort that will be necessary if other endangered habitats and
wildlife are to be salvaged on at least a token basis.
Tal I B rush of the R lo G rande
In the valley of the Rio Grande River a subtropical ecosystem unique
in the United States has been reduced through clearing and cultivation
to less than a thousand acres. This semiarid type, characterized by a
mixture of tall shrubs, harbors no species of wildlife threatened with
extinction, but it supports within our borders a peripheral community
of Mexican species that is well on the way to being lost. Included
among these are the northern chachalaca, northern white-fronted dove,
northern groove-billed and, Merrill's pauraque, northeastern elegant
trogon, northeastern rose-throated becard, northern green jay, northern
white-collared seedeater, and perhaps a dozen other birds. Mammals
ranging northward from Mexico into this part of Texas include the
jaguar, jaguarundi, coatimundi, ocelot, and margay.
It may be said of most such remnant ecosystems that relatively few
people see them and they will contribute little in the way of mass
public benefits. This usually is true also of alternative uses for the land
they occupy-in this case, more fields of vegetables and citrus groves.
It probably is public business if a sample of primitive biota anywhere
is to be preserved for longterm casual use. Such historic and biological
landmarks help to maintain the character of a locality. More broadly,
their service to science and intellectually curious minorities probably
helps to assure the integrity of our heterogeneous society. In a degree
these are abstract and sophisticated viewpoints, but such terms of ref-
erence must be considered admissible if our resource management
context is not to be completely utilitarian.
Florida Everglades
The everglades are a tropical wetland extending over southern Florida
from Lake Okeechobee to the tip of the peninsula. Congress recog
OCR for page 84
84
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
nized the unique character of this biologically rich combination of
ecosystems in 1947 by establishing Everglades National Park. It is our
third largest ( 1.4 million acres) national park and is visited by more
than a million people a year.
This vast and variable wilderness of estuaries, lagoons and sloughs,
coastal prairies, sawgrass glades, hammocks, cypress islands, mangrove
swamps, and pine forests harbors many rare and vanishing species of
birds and other wildlife. Nearly extinct birds include the everglades
kite, Cape Sable sparrow, great white heron, roseate spoonbill, reddish
egret, wood ibis, pink ibis, and southern bald eagle. Rare mammals in-
clude the manatee, Florida water rat, and everglades mink. A few
American crocodiles still are found there, and the glades are one of the
principal remaining habitats of the alligator.
As a major and irreplaceable wilderness, the Florida everglades prob-
ably present the most serious and urgent preservation problem facing
the nation. The prime question is one of water supply and progressive
changes in the hydrology of central and southern Florida over the past
century. If it is to survive in approximately the natural state that justi-
fied its establishment as a national park, the conditions that brought
about this finely adjusted ecosystem must be maintained. A National
Park Service research plan (Robertson et al., 1966) describes the
situation well:
For centuries the sheet of fresh water moving southward over the Everglades from
Lake Okeechobee, flowed through sawgrass areas of the Park and entered the Gulf
of Mexico through a labyrinth of mangrove-lined rivers and creeks. Where fresh
water flowing out of the Everglades merged with salt water of the Gulf, a shifting
zone of brackish water up to 12 miles wide has developed. The width of the
brackish zone is dependent on the quantity of fresh water flowing seaward from
the land, and hence is greatest in wet years and very restricted during drouth.
The estuarine zone referred to is well known as a rich nursery ground
for many important marine fishes, including the menhaden, black
mullet, spotted sea trout, snook, tarpon, and pompano. The same is
true of the pink shrimp, the most important commercial fishery of the
state. The Institute of Marine Science has carried out studies showing
that great reductions of fish, mollusks, and other aquatic organisms oc-
cur with the reduction of freshwater flow and the buildup of salinity.
Such changes have occurred with increasing frequency and in greater
degree in recent years. Longterm flood control and agricultural recla-
mation operations, including diversion canals to carry water directly to
the sea. have steadily changed the character of the region north of the
OCR for page 85
New Patterns on Land and Water
85
park and altered natural water relationships. A 5-year drought from
1961 to 1965 brought desiccation and near destruction to the glades.
In 1966 it was estimated that the surviving alligator population was
not more than 5 percent of that present before 1960. Bird rookeries
failed; freshwater fish survived only in deep holes; cypress domes and
bayheads were destroyed; and other plant types were jeopardized. The
fact that the park received no water through the gates in the Tamiami
Trail accentuated the natural shortage and produced the greatest emer-
gency of this kind in history (Craighead, 19661.
The drought was broken by rains in May and June 1965, and in
1966 a June hurricane brought water levels up to capacity. The recov-
ery of aquatic food organisms and the creatures dependent on them
was slow, with signs of permanent changes in evidence.
With the buildup of human populations and the competing uses for
water, the biota of the park has become critically vulnerable to drought,
and it may likewise suffer damage through the rapid release of water in
times of flood. Problems have multiplied since the creation by Congress
of the Central and South Florida Flood Control District in 1948.
This agency, the Corps of Engineers, and the National Park Service are
now coordinating studies of water control and allocation problems in
the hope that adequate provision can be made for the everglades, in
which a nationwide public interest has become manifest. Except for
this interest, the march of "progress" in southern Florida would quickly
overwhelm and obliterate an area that easily qualifies as one of the bio-
logical wonders of the New World.
Preservation of Natural Areas
Although many values may be claimed for setting aside undisturbed
areas, a single overriding purpose probably would be sufficient justifi-
cation for establishing a carefully guarded national system of this kind.
The study of biotic communities is being steadily refined. Natural re-
lationships of living things represent the most elaborate and orderly
systems of the universe, and for the foreseeable future much is to be
learned from them. It would be poor resource and science strategy to
destroy the remaining check areas and controls against which our land-
use enterprises can be measured and judged.
In conformity with this concept, and also to help implement the
participation of the United States in the International Biological Pro-
gram, a Committee on Research Natural Areas has been established in
the federal government. It includes representation from the Forest Ser
OCR for page 86
86
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
vice, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau
of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. The committee will prepare a directory
to protected research reserves on federal lands and will encourage the
establishment of new areas needed for research and education. Among
the lands and waters administered by the agencies mentioned, a wide
variety of natural or near-natural ecosystems occur and can be pre-
served. It is recognized that these have value as pools of genetic ma-
terial in its primitive forms.
It is encouraging that the American public is becoming increasingly
aware of the need to identify, establish, and protect natural areas wher-
ever they may still be found. Contributions to this end are being made
by public agencies, private organizations, and informed individuals.
In March 1966, Assistant Secretary Stanley A. Cain of the Depart-
ment of the Interior established an ad hoc Natural Areas Committee in
that department. Agencies of other departments administering federally
owned land were invited to attend the committee meetings. One of the
results was publication in 1967 by the Department of the Interior and
the Department of Agriculture of a federal directory of natural areas.
If of national significance, such areas qualify for registration under the
Natural Landmarks Program of the National Park Service.
The most important step in this field was made in 1964 with passage
by the Congress of the Wilderness Act. This act established a national
system for protecting the primitive features of qualifying areas of the
national forests, parks, and wildlife refuges. Under other legislation,
parts of the public domain may be considered for wilderness classifi-
cation. With certain exceptions, units of the wilderness system are
5,000 acres or more in size. The Wilderness Act provided for a lengthy
and somewhat unwieldy review process for adding new units. It also
sanctioned the continuation of grazing and other established noncon-
forming uses on wilderness areas. Improvements in the system may
well be in order as a result of the work of the Public Land Law Review
Commission.
In 1967, the various states purchased 201,000 acres of land and
water with assistance from the federal Land and Water Conservation
Fund. They acquired an estimated 153,000 acres under the federal aid
to wildlife and fisheries acts, the Open Space Program of the Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development, and the Greenspan Program
of the Department of Agriculture. Most of these tracts would not qual-
ify as natural areas in the primitive sense, but some are of high quality
and will steadily improve through natural processes if left undisturbed.
Their preservation for public conservation and recreation purposes
OCR for page 87
New Patterns on Land and Water
87
helps to protect them from the encroachment of urban development,
highways, airports, and similar uses.
Private organizations such as the Nature Conservancy, the National
Audubon Society, the Natural Area Council, and World Wildlife Fund
are playing a highly significant role in saving endangered remnants of
our primitive ecosystems. They are able to take options and make
other moves quickly as may be required by circumstances in which
government action is often too little and too late. Areas privately ac-
quired often are conveyed in due course to units of local, state, or fed-
eral government for longterm administration. As an outstanding ex-
ample of the cooperative effort being made in this field, the Nature
Conservancy has a $6-million line of credit from the Ford Foundation
for immediate use in making critical land purchases for the executive
branch of the federal government. This is one answer to the problem
of escalating land prices in public projects.
PUBLIC LANDS FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
A great ideal of the first settlers of North America was to build homes
on land that was their own. They knew well the conditions in Europe
where the Crown and a privileged nobility held great tracts and com-
moners little or nothing. The right of the individual to own land was,
from the first, one of the primary reasons for risking one's future in
the New World.
As a natural consequence of this viewpoint, soon after the colonies
were united as a nation, the government embarked on a program to
give away or sell all of its public lands. It was an unprecedented pro-
gram. Between 1781 and 1963, the United States Government disposed
of 1,143,800,000 acres (Orell, 19651. Small wonder that the expression
"doing a land office business" was coined to describe booming activity.
Mass disposal of land in the public domain to private citizens, cor-
porations, and states resulted in rapid settlement and development
across the nation. Sale of public land brought some financial support
to the young federal government but less than had been anticipated by
the Congress. Rushes of land-hungry settlers onto tracts ceded by
tribes of Indians, and range wars over possession and use of vast areas
of grazing lands in the West, made colorful pages in our history.
Notwithstanding the general policy of public land disposal, it be-
came clear early in our history that certain areas of land and water
would sometimes need to be kept in public ownership to serve com
OCR for page 88
88
Land Use and W ildlife Resources
mon needs of the citizens. By 1 81 7, Congress had empowered the
President to withdraw areas from entry for ad hoc purposes, such as
roads, military posts, and lighthouses. An act of 1832 authorized res-
ervations having extraordinary natural features, and later the authority
was broadened to include other objectives (Orell, 19651. Following the
rise of the conservation movement led by Theodore Roosevelt and his
chief forester, Gifford Pinchot, the Congress was encouraged to permit
the reacquisition of lands by purchase or gift from private and corpo-
rate owners. Since 1900 numerous acts have resulted in extensive land
acquisition by the federal government and by state and local govern-
ments for many uses. By 1964 some 916 million acres were owned as
public property or held in trust-about 39 percent of the total land
area in the 50 states. The federal government owned 770 million acres
(34 percent of the total land area) and held 50 million acres (2 percent)
in trust for Indians; state governments owned 78 million acres (3 per-
cent); and local governments owned 18 million acres (less than l per-
cent).
Undoubtedly, some land will continue to be acquired by public
agencies both for new projects and to block out areas now owned.
However, compared with existing acreage, the additions will not be
substantial. Many of the lands now administered by federal agencies
have been transfers from the public domain. For the future, it is likely
that most acquisitions will be in the East, and those in the West will be
more than offset by the transfer of lands now under the jurisdiction of
the Bureau of Land Management to state and private ownership.
The extent to which the 480 million acres of the public domain will
remain in federal ownership or be transferred to the states or other in-
terests may depend upon recommendations to the Congress by the
Public Land Law Review Commission This commission studied ex-
isting statutes and regulations as well as policies and practices of ad-
ministrative agencies relative to the retention, management, and dis-
position of federal lands. In addition, data were compiled as necessary
to determine and understand the present and future demands on areas
in public ownership.
Wildlife as a public resource is likely to be most intensively managed
and made most easily available on public lands of various categories:
federal, state, county, and city.
The largest area of public land is the remainder of the public domain
administered by the Bureau of Land Management. For the most part,
this is low-value grazing land that can, in many areas, be made more
useful to the public by managing it for recreation. All land-holding
OCR for page 89
New Patterns on Land and Water
89
agencies of the federal government are giving recognition to this kind
of public demand, and a similar trend is growing in state and local gov
ernments. As a basic recreational resource, wildlife is featured as a by
product of forestry and grazing, and it is a primary objective in certain
lands set aside as parks or managed refuges. The developing technology
by which uses are integrated for maximum benefits is examined in the
next chapter.
REFERENCES
Beltz, R. C., and J. F. Christopher. 1967. Land clearing in the delta region of
Mississippi, 1957-67 (research note S0-69~. U.S. Forest Service, Washington,
D.C.
Bue, C. D. 1963. Principal lakes of the United States. U.S. Geol. Surv. Circ. 476.
22 p.
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. 1967. Estuarine programs-interim report.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 29 p.
Bureau of the Census. 1962b. Graphic summary of land utilization (oh. 1, part 64.
In U.S. census of agriculture, 1959: Special reports. Vol. 5. U.S. Department of
Commerce, Washington, D.C.
Bureau of the Census, 1966. Farms and land in farms (ch. 1~. In U.S. census of
agriculture, 1964. Vol. 2. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
Cameron, W. M., and D. W. Pritchard. 1963. Estuaries, p. 306-324, Vol. 2. In
M. N. Hill fed.), The sea. John Wiley ~ Sons, New York.
Clawson, M. 1959. Changing patterns of land use in the West, p. 217-228. In F. S.
Pollak (ed.), Resources development: frontiers for research. University of Colo-
rado Press, Boulder.
Craighead, F. C. 1966. Further observations on the effects of the closure of the
culverts along the Flamingo Highway on plants and wildlife. National Park
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
Cronin, L. E.1967. The role of man in estuarine processes, p. 667-689. In G. H.
Lauff ted.), Estuaries (AAAS Publ. 83~. American Association for the Advance-
ment of Science, Washington, D.C.
Dahlen, J. H., and D. R. Thompson. 1955. Wisconsin wetlands and their impor-
tance. Wis. Conserv. Bull. 20(1): 9- 12.
Darling, F. F. 1956. Man's ecological dominance through domesticated animals on
wild lands, p. 778-787. In W. L. Thomas (ed.), Man's role in changing the face
of the earth. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Economic Research Service. 1966. The balance sheet of agriculture, 1966. Agr.
Inf. Bull. 314. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Economic Research Service. 1968a. Farm costs and returns, commercial farms, by
type, size, and location. Agr. Inf. Bull. 230. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
Economic Research Service. 1968b. Major uses of land and water in United States
with special reference to agriculture, summary for 1964. Agr. Econ. Rep. 149.
OCR for page 90
so
Land Use and Wildlife Resources
U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
ton, D.C.
Edminster, F. C.1964. Farms, ponds and waterfowl, p. 399-407. In Waterfowl
tomorrow. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Washington, D.C.
Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1936. The western range. Senate
Doc. 199,74th Cong.,2d Sess. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,
D.C.
Freeman, O. L., and I. L.13ennett, Jr. 1969. Control of agriculture-related pollu-
tion. Report to the President by the Secretary of Agriculture and Director,
Office of Science and Technology. 102 p.
Gambell, E. L. 1966. Two million farm ponds backstop America's streams, p. 48-
55. In Soil Conserv. Soc. Amer., Proc. 21st Annul Meeting.
Greenshields, E. L. 1964. Water has a key role, p. 72-96. In Farmer's world. The
yearbook of agriculture 1964. U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Haik, R. A. 1957. Water, habitat, and wildlife. Conserv. Volunteer 20: 1-5.
Hart, C. M., B. Glading, and H. T. Harper. 1956. The pheasant in California. In
D. L. Allen (ed.), Pheasants in North America. Wildlife Management Institute,
Washington, D.C.
Holmes, R. C. 1961. Composition and size of flood losses, p. 7-20. In G. F. White
(ed.), Papers on flood problems. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Krutilla, J. V. 1966. Is public intervention in water resources development con-
ducive to economic efficiency? Reprint 56, Jan. Nat. Resour. J. 6: 60-75.
Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D.C.
Lehmann, V. W.1941. Attwater's prairie chicken, its life history and management.
U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., N. -Amer. Fauna 57. 65 p.
Lehmann, V. W.1968. The Attwater prairie chicken, current status and restoration
opportunities, p. 398-407. In 33d N. Amer. Wildl. and Natur. Resour. Conf.
Trans.
Leopold, L. B. 1962. Rivers. Amer. Sci. 50~4~:511-537.
McGee, G. W.1960. Water resources developments: key to tomorrow. Western Re-
sources Conf. paper. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.
Martin, R. O. R., and R. L. Hanson. 1966. Reservoirs in the United States. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Water-Supply Paper 1838. 115 p.
Murphy, F. C. 1958. Regulating flood-plain development. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago. 204 p.
Nelson, D. 1961; Resource and metropolitan sprawl, p. 77-89. In H. L. Amoss and
R. K. McNickle (ed.), Land and water: planning for economic growth. Univer-
sity of Colorado Press, Boulder. 219 p.
Orell, B. L. 1965. Government land acquisition. American Forest Products
Industry, Washington, D.C.
Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. 1962. Shoreline recreation
resources of the United States. ORRRC Study, Rep. 4. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
President's Science Advisory Committee, Environmental Pollution Panel. 1965.
Restoring the quality of our environment. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 317 p.
OCR for page 91
New Patterns on Land and Water
91
Regan, M. M., and H. M. Wooten. 1963. Land use trends and urbanization, p. 59-
63. In A place to live. The yearbook of agriculture 1963. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Robertson, W. B., Jr., G. Sprugel, Jr., and L. Sumner. 1966. Everglades National
Park natural sciences research plan. National Park Service, U.S. Department of
the Interior, Washington, D.C.
Shaw, S. P., and C. G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and
Wildl. Circ. 39. 67 p.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1 962a. Basic statistics of the national inventory
of soil and water conservation needs. Statist. Bull. 3 17. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1 962b. Land and water resources, a policy guide.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 73 p.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1965. Soil and water conservation needs, a na-
tional inventory. Misc. Publ. 971. Washington, D.C. 94 p.
Vlasin, R. D. 1963. Highways and adjustments in farms, p. 479-488. Ir' A place to
live. The yearbook of agriculture 1963. U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
White, G. F., W. C. Calef, J. W. Hudson, H. M. Mayer, J. R. Sheaffer, and D. J.
yolk. 1958. Changes in urban occupance of flood plains in the United States.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 235 p.
Wingard, R. G., and M. R. Heddleson. (n.d.) Conservation-living in harmony with
land. Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Wooten, H. H., K. Gertel, and W. C. Pendleton. 1962. Major uses of land and water
in the United States, summary for 1959. Agr. Econ. Rep. 13. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Yeager, L. E., J. B. Low, and H. J. Figge. 1956. Pheasants in the arid Southwest,
p. 159-203. In D. L. Allen (ed.), Pheasants in North America. Wildlife Manage-
ment Institute, Washington, D.C.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
wildlife resources
