•^•"•m^^^p" f THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS SlMi: (U (Mil uliM \ iM I'M? r\!i\r (»i iM r.iK \\()|;k> !Mni.li;.Mll>N.s (»K THK LUWAIlIt ||>i \n :)Uite Knffiiicvr Reports on State Water Plan Prepared Pnrstiant to Chapter 832, Stiitutcs of 1929 i;i LLi:ri\ \(.. :\:y n.inii^^ir.Li: iiconomic i^ \tk «>K ii{Hi(.\i i()\ i)i;\ i;i.()i>\ii:\'i l\ CALII iil!\l \ A CcK)|M'raliNr Ur|M.rt \>\ llir ( ollr^r i>f VltI* nil nr'* I ni\i'r^il\ nf ( alifurnijj. 1930 10874 TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTi I- ... 1. vv^Mii I VI ..1 vv .... i:oLL.I£Ufc: OK AGIUCULTUUE TO _ 10 ACK- 11 o OK pi'iujc V la <• M.tKoUNIA. < '.E OK AUIil- IS STATfTKS Ol 14 olti:UuKli 16 CllAITKU 1 1NTIU»I' \ AN*I> SfMMAUY 17 .' IMjin "f waliT ••"('•"■rvnllon ._._„..-..__-. 17 till- pr. 18 r iiMva rnla land. . 19 < r.'i" i.i . . . .. 19 Will r.i 'i production continue to parallel ixipulutlon ^l>' <■! h > ' ' «« IX ■ ....•- — .••«.••.**•.*«—«»**«*•••.*•• — **-• 19 II I i.rM.r.t- f,,r irrlgatMl land !l rHArTKR IT r'(^pfi.ATi.iv wn i.wn ukqi'ikhmknts 2. Ir;: Cirnwth 26 26 HtrOi ratrit 27 .XforfalUv rates 80 H'tlon rmt« SO I . „ 81 .L'!i of tho f k; to A lonfr-time population forecast ^ 81 A y ..f United - .>j.ulatior» S2 Chaitkr III \X KSTIMATK OF FUTVRK CALIKOItNIA POPULATION 35 ' '■ ' '-nia population 35 >n 36 i...... ,,, ,... ... 37 Itittlo of forciini >'< "H to native .- . . ... S9 H»y < iirK.i, I,.. to rural 48 Itrt |M>pulatlon increase and net effective immi- - _ 48 Imi: ■■ its CMtabllahcd trend despite 48 The rm . lulv _..__-__.____._..__.._ . — 46 How ni.. will there he? . 47 KrcapltuUtUJit SI • 'HAlTieR IV IKENPS IN < AI.I I Kur L^ND UTILIZATION. l'.»u»-192» 67 Viirl.itl ri •• 67 t ' ■ - - • - ., tn in-oiM area 69 I harv< Htf'l in ('ullfornia ._— 60 00 IS . rtttiM -••— •••• — •••••••».»^» %% — <» - «» .- 72 ... 74 l^t 'n ViilU>> ~. — . -.^ . 77 'ii.nii. ""iiziiiiiiiiiiizir II and truck ' .._..-.. ..._.. 14 >>jK*ir i".!». t- .If,* aitu i-<.it"n ..._—— 14 llav <-r<>i>» ......_...- _— .. II >■ M '- :; It sun* fr .......—.... 91 \ 91 i, .""rrnmri 91 i 1 > I 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter V Page TREND OK HUMAN FOOU HEQUIREMRNTS 104 Methods of estimating- food requirements 104 I're-war jier capita food requirements 105 J'l-obable future food requirements 106 Interpretation of tlie estimates of Pearl and Taylor 107 Trends in production and consumption 108 Future requirements for fruits and vegetables 109 Sugar 110 Meats 111 Cereals 111 Chapter VI PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SUP- PORT OF CALIFORNIA LIVE STOCK INDUSTRIES 113 Methods of analysis of land requirements for the live stock industry 113 Pounds of digestible nutrients as a measure of feed 115 Changes in agrricultural efficiency and their relations to land require- ments for the live stock industry 115 The Dairy Industry __116 Production and consumption of California dairy products 116 The trend in feed requirements for the production of California dairy products 118 Estimated future feed requirements for the production of California dairy products : 122 The Beef Cattle Industry 124 Feed requirement for California beef breeding herds 125 Beef cattle and irrigation 129 Future feed requirements for beef production 130 The Sheep Industry 131 Future feed requirements for sheep 133 The Swine Industry 134 Future feed requirements for pork production 135 Feed Requirements for Producing California Poultry 136 Future feed requirements for poultry production 137 The Retirement of the Horse 139 Summary of Feed Requirements for All Live Stock 140 Relation of feed utilization to requirements for irrigated land 141 Future requirements for irrigated land for live stock 143 Chapter VII LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FRUITS, VEGE- TABLES AND MISCELLANEOUS FIELD CROPS 148 California fruit production 149 United States fruit production 149 Ratio of California production to United States production of orchard and vineyard fruits 152 United States per capita production of important orchard and vineyard fruits 153 Future requirements for irrigated land in California for orchard and vineyard fruits 156 Land Requirements for Vegetables 157 Per capita acreage of vegetables 157 Ratio of California acreage to that of the United States 158 Future requirements 159 Requirements for irrigated land for vegetables 159 Future Land Requirements for Miscellaneous Field Crops 159 Chapter VIII LAND REQUIREMENTS IN COMPARISON TO LANDS AVAILABLE FOR IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT 161 Irrigated areas in San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys 161 Rate of irrigation development in different parts of the San Joaquin Valley 162 Irrigation areas in the Sacramento Valley 163 Irrigable land in the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys 163 Unirngatcd Irrigable Land of tlie San Joaquin Valley 164 l^uids available for immediate development IGo Estimated Area of Unirrigalod Irrigable Land in the Sacramento River Basin 167 Land lletiuirements and Land Available 168 Land requirements 169 Crop adaptation 170 I^and utilization in Sacramento Valley irrigation districts 170 An Irrigation Development Policy 172 APPENDIX A 173 APPENDIX B 185 PUBLICATIONS OF THE DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES • 206 in LIST OF TABLES » • 1 . t: 47 4S 62 65 uf Ute luUtl crop land harvested In . . _ . . «4 ta I aub-troplcal fruits 65 i4c In the --- «« nf beans, sugnr beets 7» to th* t^txl for that ... 71 : for '. 76 .■-• .. 76 ' land I I In 79 1 "»l t I ) b LIST OF TABLES Table Page 34. The relation of the Sacramento Valley aoreaees of the individual temperate zone fruits to the total for that group and the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage of each 96 36. The relation of the acreage of potatoes to that of truck crops in the Sacra- mento Valley and the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage of each 96 36. The relation of the Sacramento Valley acreages of the miscellaneous field crops to the total for that group and the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage of each 99 37. The relation of the Sacramento Valley acreage of the bay and forage crops to the total for that group and the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage of each 99 38. The relation of the Sacramento Valley acreages of the cereal crops to the total for that group and the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage of each 102 39. Gross consumption in calories i)er adult man per day in the United States__ 106 40. Pre-\var gross consumption in calories per adult man per day compared with estimated future requirements 107 41. Trend of California butlerfat production, classified on the basis of utilization in importable and non-importable products 117 42. Average weight of digestible nutrients in food required to produce 100 pounds of butterfat for cows producing different amounts of butterfat annually 122 43. Feed requirements in digestible nutrients for California butterfat production, 1899-11129 123 4 4. Estimated future feed requirements for the production of California dairy products 124 45. Pounds of digestible nutrients required to produce a pound, live weight, of California beef 126 46. Estimated feed retiuirements for California beef slaughter, exclusive of slaughter from dairy herds, 1924-1929 126 47. Estimated California beef slaughter by weight and its distribution with respect to source of supply, 1924-1929 128 48. Estimated supplementary feed requirements, 1922-1929, for California-pro- duced beef, exclusive of slaughter from dairy herds 129 49. Annual per capita consumption of beef and veal in the United States, and annual per capita slaugliter of beef and veal in California, 1909—1929 130 50. Estimated California beef cattle slaughter, numbers and live weight, 1909- 1929 131 51. Estimated supplementary feed requirements for California-produced Iamb and mutton, 1922-1929 132 52. Estimated slaughter of California-i)roduced sheep and laml)S, 1922—1929 133 53. Annual pt-r capita consumption of lamb and mutton in the United States, and annual per capita lamb and mutton slaughter in California, 1922- 1929 133 54. Estimated feed requirements, other than pasture and garbage, for California- produced pork, 1922-1929 135 55. Estimated slaughter of California-produced swine, 1922-1929 135 56. Annual per capita consumption of pork (excluding lard) in the United States, and annual per capita slaughter of pork in California, 1922—1929 136 57. Estimated feed requirements for California poultry. 1922-1929 138 58. Basis of estimating feed requirements for California poultry, 1922-1929 139 59. Estimated feed requirements for California horses and mules, 1922—1929 140 60. Numbers of horses and mules in California, 1909-19.'i0 141 61. Trends in feed requirements for California live stock. 1909-1930 143 62. Trend in nutrient re(|uirements for California live stock, 1909-1929, showing approximate i)roi)orlions derived from various types of feed 145 C3. Digestible nutrients from grain and other concentrates fed annually to Cali- fornia live stock, 1922-1929 145 64. Estimated trend in irrigated acreage utilized in producing feed for Cali- fornia live stock, 1909-1929 146 65. Calfornia production of sub-tropical and temperate zone fruits 150 66. United States ijroduetion of grapes, citrus fruits and temiierate-zone fruits 150 67. Percentage relationsliip I)etween California and United States production of orchard and vineyard fruits. 1909-1929 152 68. United States per cai)ita production of important grroups of orchard and vineyard fruits, 1909-1929 156 69. Estimated future trends in the demand for bearing acreage of orchard and vineyard fruits and nuts in California 157 | 70. Ratio of California vegetable acreage to United States vegetable acreage. 11119-1928 158 I 71. Irrigated area in acres in the San Joaquin Valley ' 162 72. Irrigatui|tuted according to ago and APPENDIX B Table Page •i..n In ' -I'JZ-J .f thr 1 t in the San )>eartnR Rub-tropical and in < ,iii'*>ii:i,i 1.*; > 1 '..< . .. — — . . — *l- the BcreaKen of the bearing aub-tropical trulta in ring tri fruits in :9 iii- -• - . - Cal'i- ill Innd In farmii In the San Joaquin frulu'in fruUs ••• ■ in '» th«« II rrulta to K. Arr- V. to I 7 I LIST OF PLATES Plate I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. XXI. XXII. XXIII. XXIV. XXV. XXVI. XXVII. Page Miijor usi'S of California land in 1925 following page 18 Trends in the major ii. the California harvested acreage of alfalfa, fruits and nuts and all crops compared with population increase 20 Figure 1. Number o' births per 1000 women between the ages of 15 and 4 1 in the California population. Figure 2. Number of deatliK in California compared to population 2'.t California population trends, sliowing proportions which are California, native other than California and foreign born 38 Figure 1. Net effective immigration into California during the past five decades by ten->ear age groups. Figure 2. Percentage age distribution of net effective immigration into California, lSSO-1930 40 Figure 1. Male immigration into California as a per cent of United States increase. Figure 2. Net effective immigration into California by ten-year age groups, each shown as a per cent of United States population increase in the same age group. Figure 3. Net effective immigration into California, all ages ten and over, as a per cent of United State-s population increase ages ten and over, showing future possible trends 44 Figure 1. Trend in tlie numbers of children per 1000 women of child- bearing age in California, 1 880-1930, with estimate of future trend to 1970. Figure 2. Trend in the number of children in the California popu- lation, expressed as a percentage of the total poi)uIation, 1880-1930, with estimate of future trend to 1970 50 Figrure 1. Percentage age distribution of California population ten years of age and over. Figure 2. Percentage age distribution of California female popu- lation ten years of age and over. Figure 3. California population ten years of age and over as a per cent of total California population, showing estimated future trend 53 Figure 1. California population, 1890-1930, and estimated future population, showing reasonable limits of future growth. Figui-e 2. Net effective innnigration into California, 1880-1930, showing future immigration necessary to attain populations shown in Figure 1 56 Figure 1. Harvested acreage and trend in the harvested acreage of wheat in California. Figure 2. Rearing acreage and trend in the bearing acreage of pears in California 58 Trends in the non-bearing acreages of the sub-tropical and temperate zone fruits in California 61 Trends in the non-bearing acreages of the sub-tropical and temperate zone fruits in the San Joaquin Valley 62 Trends in the acreages of total crop l;ind harvested, classified accord- ing to major groups, in California 63 Trends in the bearing acreages of sub-troi)ical fruits in California 67 Trends in the bearing acreages of the temperate zone fruits in Cali- fornia 68 Trends in the acreages of vegetable crops harvested in California 70 Trends in the combined acreages of sugar beets, beans and cotton harvested in California 71 Trends in the acreages of hay and forage 'crops harvested in Cali- fornia 73 Trends In the acreages of cereal crojjs harvested in California 75 Trend.s in the acreages of all lands in farms, classified according to major uses, in the San Joatiuin Valley 78 Trends in the acreages of the total crop land harvested, classified according to major groups, in tlie San Joaquin Valley SO Trends in the be.iring acreages of the sub-tropical fruits in the San Joaquin Valley 82 Trends in the bearing acreages of the temperate zone fruits in the San Jo.Kiuin Valley 83 Trends in the acreages of sweet potatoes, white potatoes and truck crops liarvested in the San Joaquin Valley 85 Trends in the combined acreages of sugar beets, beans and cotton harvesl<-d iri the San Joaquin Vall'-y 87 Trends In the acreages of hay and forage crops harvested in the San Joacpilii Vall.v 88 pm« 1 In the San Joaquin „.. 89 '"d, claiuiin«d , , . 92 'a in t' jS «"'IH' iiiiiitt In thiT .-iaiiit- _ _ __ _ ^ _- 97 - » 98 . and cotton 100 1 In the 101 1 in th' >:iic >w III • .1 i. i"i i!;.i ,1 ml LIST OF ri.ATES PUte XXVIII. Tr^nilji In the Vrtllov XXIX. Tr. \XX T. XXXI. Ti. XXXII. Tr. , ; XXXIII. Tr "r'^m VXXIV. Tr. XXXV. Tr. \.i\U\ .. . XXXVI Trfn«l!i In Uu> nui XXXVll KiKur- 1 th.it |>r KiK»tr«- I' k<|>t f. • y XX VIM FtiT • ' ^" • ,.u;!rli'iffuri> I ible nutrlenta required to produce Fir .>r. ahowlni: approximate ly.-- 127 XI«. TreiiU.s 111 I««U i.uliteiii .h fur California produced live stock --_ .- 142 XLI. Fiifure 1 s required by California lIVl. St. Flinirc - ir 'I to the pro- n of K 144 XLII. FiRure 1. I*r. , «.iii mIm combined. Fiifure 2. Pr . and t«'mj>'.>rate xone fruits. Kiir\ire S. I»r ,nd citrus fruits ISl XI. Ill l"iiri!r.- 1. I'n.'- . - - . - . :... vrat'' 7. .I'.. ;iii.i •itih-tropi. fruits. . •• 2. rnlt.-.-l st.ntrs prndti.-Tlnn of frmr"^?' KU'urf 3. Ut . 154 XLIV Kie^ir*- 1 }'. : 8 '•( wicliiiru And vtii«^>aivi (luilii, mUum kiiK poMiiltlv future h iK -r-- -. intt'd Stat'!" i>tr Ion Of Important vroupa of orchard ats-l \ltif>ar'I : • 133 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Mk. Edward IIvatt, State Engineer, Sacraniento, California. Dear 8ik: I transmit herewitli a manuscript entitled " IVrmissible Economic Rate of Irrigation Development in California,'' by David "Weeks. This is one of the reports which you requested the College of Agri- culture to prepare for you dealing with certain economic aspects of the state Avater plan. You will recall that I appointed a committee from our staff to confer with you in connection with outlining this work, it being understood that this committee would also review tlic report prior to its being forwarded to you. This committee has carefully reviewed this manuscript and recom- mends its transmittal to you. It approves the manuscript as presenting a reasonable analysis of the factors governing trends in our agricultural development and our needs for agricultural land, particularly inten- sively cultivated irrigated land. I trust that the report will be found to cover the ground you had in mind when referring the matter to the College of Agriculture. Verv sincerelv vours. Dean, College of Agriculture. Berkeley, California, « Oclob.T :!0, V.rM). ( 10 ) ACKNOWLEDGMENT A work of this kind covt'rinj? siu-li a wide scope naturally could not bo that of a sinple individual. The staffs of the Division nf Water n..v,,urces of the State Department of Public Works, the A};ricultural Economics and Extension Divisions of the University of California and of the (Jiannini Foundation liavi' <;en»'rously contribut«'d valuable infor- mation. Especial nnntion should be made of the contribution of certain individuals without which the report could not have been written. These include data compiled especially for this investigation by E. E. Kaufman and Geo. A. Scott, the Cost of Production Studies by Pro- fessor K. L Ailaiiis and L W. Fluharty. the Studies of Fruit Produc- tion by Dr. S. W. Shear, and the Economic Stutlies of tin* Live Stock Situation by Professor E. C. Voorhies. The active cooperation of Eilward Hyatt. Stat«' Kiiirineer. and Dean C. li. Hutchison of the Collepe of Apricidture of the L'niversity of Califoniia. represents a new step of projrress in placinjj the research facilities of the University at the disposal of tho.s<> n'sponsible for determininif state policy. The a.ssistance rendered by the State Enijineer's office made possible the anal.vsis in Chapter VIII and the preparation of the drawings of the entire report. The assi.stants of the Collejje of Agriculture who have been employed directly in tlie investijration .should also re<'eive recogni- tion for important eontribution.s. Harold Iloflirh a.s.sisted in determin- ing' land re<|uirement.s for the live stock industry, Frederick Church on the i>opidation problem, Lorna Finch on the index of affricultural pro\Iojave river and its trib- utaries, and all other water resouree.s of southern California. Sec. 2. The department of public works, subject to the other pro- visions of this act. is ein])owered to ex]>end any portion of the appro- priation herein provided for the ])urposes of this act, in cooperation with the government of the United States of America or in cooperation with ])olitical subdivisions of the State of California -. and for the pur- pose of such cooperation is hereby authorized to draw its claim upon said api)roi)riation in favor of the United States of America or the ajipropriate agency thereof for the payment of the cost of such portion of said cooperative work as may be determined by llie department of ]>ublic works. Sec. 3. Upon the .sale of any bonds of this state hereafter authorized to be i.ssued to be expended for any one or more of the purposes for which any ])art of the appropriation herein provided may have been expended, the amount so expended from the approju'iation herein provided .sliall be returned into the general fund of the state treasury out of the proceeds first derived from the sale of said bonds. ( 14 ) FOREWORD riiis rrporl i.s oxw ol a si-ru's t)t" bullftm^ on \\io State Water I'lan issutni by the Division <>f \Vat«'r Hesourcfs pursuant to the provisions of Chapter S.T2. Statutes of 1920. direftinjr ftirther invest i^f at ions of the water resources of California. The series includes Bulletin Xos. 25 to 36. inclusive. liulletin No. 25. "Ilt'port to Lejjislature of 19'M on State Water Plan," is a sununary report of the entire investigation. Prior to the studies carried out under this act, the water resources investigation had been in projrress more or less continuously since 1I'21 under several statutory enactments. The results of the earlier work have been published as Bulletin Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6. 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19 and 20 of the former Division of Kufrineerinp and Irrigation, Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of the former Division of Water Rights and Nos. 22 and 24 of the Division of Water Resources. This bulletin is one of two rei)orts dealing with eertain economic aspects of the State Water Plnn i.r.pnro.l hv the College of .Nirritulturi-, I'niversity of California. The rate at which additional supplies of water will Ijc neede«l for the irrigation of California lansition and oharactiT >f h«'r land and water res«)urees. Tlio advantap's which the state pos- ossos, however, have worketiy. the production of orchard and yanl fruits, cxpamls its acreage in response to favorable jirices intil checked by the stress of a surplus. This check comes frotn three o five or more years after the acreage which will create a suri)lus has ' ' *.^d. This is the period of time reipiire*! for fruits to come ::;>'. Ill the meantime tli»' orchards and vineyards continue o be planteil. The period of pessimism which follows generates a hortage which in the long run may b«» just as detrimental as the sur- ' ^ Data available on I'nited States fruit production show that the two periods ot" maximum per capita prodiu-tion were about eleven •ears apart. While this economic phenomenon op<^rates in other states ntirely independent of irrigation, in ('alif<>rnia the fniit production '•• is a "' ' ' inir • I'Miient when superimposed upi»n the other vici.ssi- s whii;. : irrigation d«'velo|»m«'nt. Anoth'T characteristic of irrigation which is not peculiar alone toCaU- ornia. but is a common caus<' of difficidty wherever irrigation is jirac- 1 on a large .scale, should !■ ' The mod«'rn irrigation ■•' '- "-'lally of sii.'h mau';..: . : . .;use of the character of r sup[)lies. that there Is made availal>le morr land than nay be needed immediately upon the comj)letion of the project. This ! at oner iniMirs th«' of n*i ■' (tf the projict cost. an"s a me»' •■••• ♦" ♦' ; .lance o; ; , .;!ibrium in the supply of ural ' II up«»n a growing market, as the over- ! cost of carrying it as un lie niadc of iiftriciiltmiil land retniircnu'iits in ordiT to ihMcr- iniiM- (In* riito at wliirli the now water sjipplies are to be d»'vclo|>ed to meet I the iniTeasinc demand for ("nlifornia aRrienltnr.iI iirodnrfs. The jioints to ; he considert'd will iiiclndi* trends in I he utilization of land, trends in the | devclo|»ment and use of water sni)plied ami in the area of iriijrated land. ;inal\scs of the causes of rh.-inKes in land utilization. |io|iulalion growth, ; availahle land areas, and the ureas of l.md tli.il will iirojiahly lie neede»<"•. wOST Year TRENDS IN THE MAJOR USES OF CALIFORNIA LANDS •»•»« •-It ijvTr or n:it!<;ATiov nr.vKi.nrMKST ID Trcnda in th« Major Use* of California Land. Tlu' Ijiiiil arm of i'nlit'ornia is approximately 100,(MM),(K)0 acres, Acrea^res rxpri'ss.«.l in millions, ilnn'fort'. also in«lirat(> the pereenta^es whieli earli major use bears to the total. The j;ros.s area of the state is .shown in IMate I,* whieh also drives the relative magnitude of the areas tievoteii to the various major uses in VX2't. The ditTerent types of forest cover in that year eomprised a third of the total, wliile desert, water surfai*'. urhan area, and miM-ellaneous unelas-sitied uses eom- prisi'd nearly another third. Aj;rienlture i>eeupie«l the remaining third, hut a small part of this was ilevotetl to harvested erops. Chancres in the major land uses sinee 1I>'J.'» liave been sli;rht. Tin- irre.tt volnmr of California's harveste0 per cent. Chaufres in the major utilization of land over a lonir period of time may have an important bearini.' upon the total volume of au'ricultural proiluction. ••specially when the livf str)ok industries are considered. Crop Land Utilization. Durin}» tlie past twenty years the area of land in farms has not expamleil and the eroppetl area has inereasni oidy 1.') per eent. There have Ih'cu outstandin-.' changes. h<»w«>ver. in the utilization of the crop land. X<»twithstandinir this small increas** in the crop land area, airri- cultural protluction has more than doubled. California population in the meantime has followed or has been fidlowed by the jjrowlh in agri- cultural pro«luctit>n. Fiiruie 1 of Plate III shows liow nearly popiila- tion growth has paralleh-d the trend in a;;rieultural |>ro!lueti(»n.+ Fipure 2 of this same plate shows that it has Immii the expansion of our fruit acreajje which lias been lartfcly responsible for the phenomenal trrowth in our airric'idtural pro." v. for it will be seen that neither the ai're«i»e of total '•■•'••■ ' '"d h... .■ -■ d nor the a«'r«'aue of alfalfa have had rates of incr»*a- ■■ as population, while the fruit acreage has kept Well aheail of population growth. Will California Agricultural Production Continue to Parallel Population In Ita Rate of Growth? Contrary to jmpular impres-sions, the phenomenal growth of ''"■ Calitornia fruit industr\ has not Ih-cu the n*sult of pernuinent incri in the per capita consumption nor a rapid inen'as<> in foreign shipments. ido pn««iblc by thr rriwarch of .Mr r- ! and rii«> UmIm ftuin «ktikh IU«» i>Utu lijta l>«^»i) con* 20 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES riate III 10 C ^ 1000 700 o i/> 500 ^ 400 § 300 200 J5 Q- O INDEX NUMBERS OF CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND RATE OF CALIFORNIA POPULATION GROWTH COMPARED — I 1 — - — , , , 1 , f , , . FIGURE I California agricultural productioriv, 1919 Year 1929 100 RATES OF GROWTH IN THE CALIFORNIA HARVESTED ACREAGE OFALFALFA, FRUITS AND NUTS AND ALL CROPS COMPARED WITH POPULATION INCREASE tn c o 70 F SO c cr 40 o ro 30 -> o. o 20 XJ c- <\J «/> a> 10 fT5 «»- O / If) D C ■; m v> ZD 4 O .£- ■♦— M l^ O «/» T3 / ai I— TD c: 3 ■ r- 7 r \ ~- ' 1 I 1 ' ' ■ ' 1 1 T T' " - FIGURE 2 - - - r- i ■ - Total crop land harvested' -| ■ - : U. ] 1 Frui t and nut acre^e^ ^_,^ -""^ j - 1 1 ~i r- ' 1 - J ,^.—^— -^^ » - " _ ^ " y - ' Alfalfa' - ^ — ■ ^.^ "■ " ; " " Population I . ^ 1909 1914 1919 Year 1924 1929 i UAi. ... i...v....VlION l>K.VKI.OI'MKNT -1 TluTC has bit'n somo imTi-aso in I'luted Stnti*s p«'r capita consumption in rtH'ont yoars, but most of this incn-asr has pn>l)ably b<. Th.- per capita pnuhu-tion of all I'liitivl s fruits in 1914 ami 1U15 was as prcat if not j?rcatcr tlum tlurinj; tlio past few years. The increase in ralifornia has lnvii nunle possible by a shift of a ^'rfal<'r and t'n-ater perciMitaire of the Tnited S' ■' :)ro«liu'tio!i to California fruit fanns. In twenty years we hav.' d . the ratio of California fruit produc- tion to that of the United States. During' tin* past few years California proiluetion of orchard and viiwyard fruits ha?* averat^rd l') p»'r emt of the protluction of the entire country. The rate of increase of Cali- fornia fruit pnxluction can not keep up »iid«'ss new trends are estab- lishe iMmsidcrrd in llu' li^rlit oi new knowledi?e reerntly (' - ' immI by sttidents of the jrrowth and compo- sition of the United " i)oj)ulation. Thi' rate of natural increase of the United States ponidation is less than one-third of what it was in 1 ■■"''. and because of chanirt's in the composition of the ]topulation it is iicted that the rate of natural increase will continue to doclinc. .» the rate of Uniteil Stat«'s population trrowth will remain for some time the dominant factor in determininir the rate of expansion of the California fruit indu.stry, these trends in United States population ■•"owth are sii.""*^ - vt. There are . e elements in the picture, however, the most important one beinp the prowth of California population The popu- lation of the state has inrn^ased 13*^ piT cent in the past twenty yoars and 65 per cent (^ •■•••_' the past decadf. There has boen an upward tr«'nd for numy d- n the ratio of California imniiirration froin other gtates and foreijrn countries, to the increaso of United States population. ^" use of the lartre reservoir of population from which the increasintr h«'rs of California population an* drawn, the decline in the rate of • th in the Unitf^d Stat»*s population should not have an imni'^diate and important <>flrert in ndueinfr California prowth. Chanpes in the tion of the United Stat«'s population have already had a marked ' " -• and nativity composition in California. i; - nuiy ha|)()en to change the trend of immi- prat ion suddenly, it seems rea.sonable. in the lipht of evidence pre- sent»d in ( III. to rxprrf a pi>' n in 1M4<) brfwi-on ^..'iiX) (MK) and ^'JOO' ]')-^0 h> n,,.„.wo() „nd I'J.f^OO.OOO. in 1060 botw.M-n 1 J ") and 16 7 >. and in l:»7() b.tw.'.ii 17,(MK1,(KM) and 20..*.00.000 Future R«quiram«nt< fo>- Irrigated Land. o>f . nf ••ars. I:. _ , :its ■ ir that population, pivintr n, of cotirne, to trends in pro- duction per acre of crops and of live stock pro«lucts and to foreipn trade. Th«^ pr»^'nif » .•,•,. . ^ thfs.' earlier rf'ports in resrard to this pa , ; prf tnr.. it sorms. how»^ver. that the ros ould be intorproted with ? .li/jition that 22 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES l»opulation fri-owtli, evon in this enlightened country, may still be influ- enced by the relative ease with which it can produce its food supplj'. In other words, the future poi)Ldation of the United States, while {greatly influenced by iiHxk'rn social standards, the growing love of indeiiendeiice from home duties, drudgery, and responsibility, will depend to some extent upon the relative scarcity of farm land of a ([uality tliat will comi)are with that already under cultivation and which can be i)ut under cultivation at a cost in labor and materials that will not discourage those who att('in])t to develop new projects. To supply our needs for food we have many alternatives so far as land utilization is concerned. In fact, we may use much land or little land as we choose, regulating the output of agricultural products by the amount of labor and capital we elect to put upon it. This flexi- bility is limited only by the relative cost of obtaining that production by the use of different amounts of land. As our population grows and our land becomes scarce we seek to obtain more products from the same area. This we have accomplished in California by irrigation, by increasing the output of butterfat per cow, and by other means. In general we have increased our output per acre only by making heavier and heavier investments. We have, of course, in many cases made definite advances in the efficiency of production. It is often very difficult to determine whether an increased production per acre is the result of an increased expenditure per acre or the result of improve- ment in methods of production. We have greatly reduced the amount of feed and hence the amount of land required to produce a pound of butterfat without materially reducing the cost. The hasic criicrion, therefore, as to the demand for more farm Javel is that acreage should he added to just that cxteiit which teill provide, the needed siipplji of agricultural products more cheaply than coidd he done hy increasing the investment in lahor and equipment on lands- alrcadjf under cultivation. This, of course, is the ideal. Available statistics do not permit of exact measurement of the elements which are essential to setting up such a criterion. All that can be done is to observe trends of per capita consumption, production, acreage, popu- lation, and efficiency of production, and in particular what the land resources are in compari.son with land requirements. The results of such an analysis are given in the seven chapters following. A word should be said here concerning the limitations of the esti- mates which have been made. Although for the most part rational analysis has been i)ossible, in develoi)ing the results given in the final conclusions there liave been many elements which have seemed almost iiii])ossible of determination. ]\[any unforeseen changes in production and consumption may be expected. Aside from the uncertainty of future imiuigration into California. Ilici-e have been certain aspects of the i)roblciii which have been very l)aftling. The estimate of future fruit jjroduclion in tlie United Slates has not been involved in so many uncertainties as has been the eslimale of the ])roi)ortion of that total which may Ix' expected to he produced within California. The upper and lower reasoual)le limits of the future ratio between California production and United States ])roduction are far apart, and the exact trend of California pidiliu-tion between these limits will be governed not alone by the deiiumd for fruit in tlie T'nited States and foreign RATF «»r IKKIUATIUN I>r\ FI OI'MKNT '2'.] couutrit'S, but will Im' vory jrroatly iiitliu'iu'iMi l»v tin* niiuMint of pifMluc tion in r«»m|)»'fiiii: arta>, aii«I to tin* i«xt«iit that California hrj-oini's njr;;r»'ssivf in taking' ovrr tin- fruit-proijiu'lion in«liistry as Iut s|M'«'ialiiy. Kon'fiistinjr tlu'sf tiTn«ls lln'irfon' inv«»lv»»s a.vsiiniption as to what Ciiliforuia's policy is to he. ('Hiifornia's artioii will havr wry iinuli t«) ilo with tin' prii'mtaLT'' of !*iiit«'tl Statt-s fruit pnnhu'tion which will '"' pro«liu*»'il witiiin the bortlcrs of this statr. Similarly th«* livi- stm-k imlustry prfsi'iits (|m'stions ec|iially tlilTicult. The estimnti's in this n-port hav«» Imm'H ha.s«»«l upon thr asstnnption that prosrnt oharat'ti'ristirs of supply and demand in tin* dairy intiustry w ill — ' MU«'. It is nlmovt I'tTtain that tln'M* i-ondilions will not contiiuu' \y as at present, hut we have no basis upon which to estimate future chanjjes in these intaunrible elements. There are many who do not beli«'ve that the aereaire estimated for the live stock industry in this report will he reis than it is at the ]>resent time. In the b«i'f industry revolutionary chancres in production are in the oftinsr. In connection with both the sheep and beef indusiries increase in the efficiency of pastures cfuistitutes a most uncertain element It must be reco[rnized. however, that California produeer>i will prob- ably share with the rest of the country any advantages to be ^'aine«l by increased efficiency of production. In the past, California has not been backward in extendintr her markets. introjni/.cd. The estii! ■ iven should Im> used with ftdl r ■• ti of the niir#'rtninT\ . iiure. They an- the In-st inferen- , •• "'ii the tinp knowleilt'e It must also be |>ointe(l out that the trends indicated in the following chapters in general «!o n«»t take into consid- .•■;*.' ' - from normal. ( hir businevs strtietur*'. as well , . .:• .„-; ^fr\ is sii!.i.-,f f(» eyclieal variations. We are ow in a rather »• n which in itself will probably have a marked efTect on the demand for at^rieultural eommon but which is not now 1. This land is jwtentially available for early lr iu>\v llVl^^' in California fame IhTf ilurinj: tlu- past .I.hwuU'. This is trur notwitlistandinj; tlu" fart that only almut 10 jmm- o-nt of ('Hliforniu's native sons and (laujfhtrrs inovtMl perniani-nlly away from thr stutr of their hirtli. This is a sniaUi-r porrentajr*' than is h>s1 l»y any otht-r state. Contrary to a coiiunon i>elief. this inflnx of innni^rants fnmi othfr parts nf this and forrivrn eountri«"s is not of th«' at;<'«l and fet-hle srckin'/ only the mild winters of the Paeifie shores. I>nt eonsists of men and women in th«' prime of life cominjr in seareh of opportnnitifs ft inopulation upon the future rates of prowth in California. We miu'ht iro farther and wiy the same of world p" ' ' • ■ ' some device must s«>rvr ojir n«'eds for an estimate of this : .. . ...lence which will reduce tlie Minount of analysis to a sco|M' within reach of available facilities. UecliniiiiT birth rates and iineqtnd Chanel's in ratra of nmrtality '" - of Iwith our national and state populations are .4.;.. : :., .._ , -It ion to such an extent that an incrcasinj^ per- eentape of older p»i.p|r has been in evidence for a ntnnber of decades in |K>pulations of state and nation; njori'over the available immigrants are Win - ' ' " '••ction, the incominir irroup havinp on the V, .; ..iiution than that of those amonj; whom they had p: : of thoH«' who are already here. The rate therefore at which thj-s** people move to California has had. and will - ' ' -'iirbinir influence on the i< iposititm of our t .. , I ■ "nd this in turn has ;: . . ; i. and will continue to nff'-et. tin- rat.- of natttral increas**. Th«*s«'. however, are not all of tlie complications. Cyclical tendencies in ojir birth rate acid to ' the extent of d' '"d trend, ami f ntimbers in the :... poptdation to :i. and chanpos in our immigration laws and immigration law enforcement all make the establishment of tangible limits of future |>optiIation jrrowth in California most difficult. the difficulties of inter chanpes' in sex ratios, r those of rural, native to rmt*- < '*<*tw««n blrihii and 4««iha •J 6 DIVISIOX OF WATER RESOURCES Tlie question arises, as to -whether it might not be foolhardy to attenii)t a Toreeast. Tlie answer is tliat the inipoi-tanee of some attempt is as great as tlie dififieulties involved, and all tliat is asked is clemency on the part of those Avho in future years compare the results of this investigation with i)ast events. It is hoped they will remember they are looking back and that this report is looking ahead through telescopes having lenses none too ]M'rfeet. iiialdng use of such materials as are readily at hand. Furthermore, lest the work become available too late to serve the purpose for which it is intended, many short cuts have been made necessary. These liave been taken, however, with the basic prin- ciples in mind and the estimates of future poimlation are presented with a certain degree of confidence, subject of course to a sensible degree of caution in their ai)plication. PRINCIPLES OF POPULATION GROWTH A few more general statements should be made before entering ui)on the kernel of the problem. These concern the broad principles of popu- lation growth. It has been necessary to eliminate, for the want of space, a review of much of the work of others in this field. No serious work on ])opulation. however, fails to mention the work of Malthus and the long line of economists who have alternately sung his ])raise and condemned him. He wrote his statements in the light of the knowledge of his day and tlie worst that can be said of him is that he failed to take into consideration all of the factors that aflfect population growth. He certainly recognized some of the important elements we may be criticized for slighting. Among these may be mentioned natural resources. Other important phases of the problem which must be considered in an estimate of fiilure |)ojni]ation covering several decades are birth rates, mortality rates and immigration. Natural Resources. Population growth if not limited by some other cause certainly may be limited or stimulated by natural resources. In the present investi- gation agricultural land resources have been given as complete con- sideration as seems necessary. This is because they are the object of the study. Minerals, however, and water i>ower have admittedly been left out of the ])icture except indirectly, as will be described later. Trade facilities and ])ossibilities ol' commercial ami industrial develop- ment and the intangible resources which in their various combination^ make Cjililornia siicli an attractive i)lace to live, all contribute to the l)lieiioiiieii;d growth which has taken place. liidir(>ctly. however, these have all been taken into account by ;i study of tlieir combined resultant effect ui)on the po|)ulation, and it is in the trends of the population itself that they are reflected. In fact iiopulation growth is the most (oiiiplrte index available of tlic i"ite at which natural rescnirces are capabli! of being developed. Some speculation should be made, how- ever, upon the likelihood of these induences continuing at the same rate as in the past, especially in the light of other important elements at work having a more oi- less negative influence. KATE OK IKKKiATliiN nKVKU)l'MENT -7 BirtH Rjite*. ( iai 1,'is in lurth rjitrs are sij,'iw(i«'jmt from tlio staii(l|»«»ir>t o\' apprjiis- iiiL' luivr Imm-ii luiuU- l»y (ifhrrs of fiittirr TriitiMl Stjifrs population and with n'sprct to working' out a l>a.sis of rstiinatinj; drcadr by doondr thr futun* California rliild population. Tin' sharp doclinr in tlu' birth ratr (hiring' and sintv tlu' war has apparently b«'on world wid«'. In Kuropr tluri' has hrru a sti-ady d»'«*lin«' sin«'i' InTIi in tin- nunibor of births p«>r thousand persons in the popidation. Knmi an awra^re birth rat«> <»f :i*J.S births p.'r KMM) in th«' population in the five-year perio*!. ISTf. to ISStl. the rate fell to 1*).2 in I'JL'G* That a similar «dianL'e is taking' place in the I'nited States- has hern IMtinted out in the following' statenunt by Thompson .md \V)i. Ipton of the Soripps Fojimlation of the Miami I'niversitv: In fln» t'tiit«'(l Stiitos ii«» n wlmlf. the birth r.itf hn** Imimi i|i<<*litiinic vory rniMdlr of Intr ycnrH. Althouich thin ilwlino riininiPiifwl nvir n r«'nt>iry nifo, it lias t>oi»n {Mirlirultirly iniirk«-in 12.1.7 ii thotisiiiiil of |i<>|iiiliit ion to in.7. <>r over Tho il««:ilh rate, i>n tlir otluT h«ncl. lias fiin<*n iii 1!>20 Iuim .scnnM'ly fiillpn at all. Tlio mjtull i« that a crudo rate «»f natural inrnMinr of lO.fl in in2>», which appransi vory liiw thrn. \\i\h fallt-n on«-thirfI, to ".'l, in th** year 1!>2S. This is pn'lwiM.v not nion' than onf^thinl to onc-foiirth of what it was prior to ls;X». Ilui that is not all. For ••vm a i-ontiiuiation of tho prvsont t'irth and doath niti-s at oa thing oan Ik» that tho prosont birth rntos iin» K<>mi; to do<-lino xtill fiii^hor in thf noar fiitiiro. Th<' l>o»t ovidoni-o "f that dorlino is found in tho fart that tho lirjS liirlh rnti-H for «"ortain -••i'tions of tho |N)|tulatii>n aro much l>o|ow those for tho ontiro country. Alroady tho ' f our larifo ritios. and indool. has birth ratos t biw t«i maintain its prosont numbor" oror an.r mn«idorablo (voriixl of tiino. Thus if tho 1J>2S birth nito«« and doath rnton at oa«-h ago of lifo prorail in tho fnturo and no adilirinns aro niado. oxoopt throiiKh birthn from within tho ITT' . M .tlM niid Now Y'lrk otn»it. and oicht ••hor of our larr* - • "^ will dorline 40 i>or oont. • • • Our • Mh'>w that tho rato of inrronso will \h> only twr>-thirdi« III til- in tho dofiwlo 1!»30 10 as in tho doi-acb- just ondin»: and t: _r'>\%^h will l>o littlo if any grontor than it was in tho doi-ado 1S!M» inoo. With thin gmkt dwlin<> in ixtpulation crowth and with n plnr * • ' ■ ]\ \n rxn^M of oiir doinands. it rotpiiron no pnipbot to f..r * fnon nni* "oiin cine to faro itomo formidnblo prnblmis in -n to tho now Nitiiation. Will Ihoy bo abb- rii»il\ nml "luiiktv that niir proMpority will not lap***? • • • T' * ' ' " ^^ •' n f* ni-i 11 St I iiDi'il ill thus Im- flvo |iors<>ns und«T twonty >pnf> "i nc- i^r i-:u-h Ion iirr^xius tttrr Idly, ibo ratio will dmp tu til .-'>>■ t.. t,-I< 1. . I>l .1, ) .If 'in fl>Illl\ t H««eent invest iiratiofiH of the fMipulation problem have revealed the ? ity of • -nt of metluNl in the ujm' of birth rates. niflTerenees ' -- and s«\ •ii^irdiiition within a |>o|itilation brin^ about tlifTerenoeK R R . Tho ItalAnrr of Illrtha ami IVafhn Pa»»> 9. Tho MarmllUn W H and V K Wholnion. A Nation of KIdora In (ha Makinc Th" Ar: jry V»r-» 3««-3>l April. 1»10. 28 DTVISIOX OF WATER RESOURCES in crude birth rates, even thoiifrh the births per one thousand women of cliildboariiijr af>e remains the same. The crude birtli rate is the iiuniber of cliildren born expressed as a ])ercenta^e of the entire popu- hition. It is an inadequate means of measuring natural increase in a population having a shifting composition either because of declining birth rates or immigration. There has been some s'lioculation as to what extent the present sharp decline in birth rate indicates a permanent change in fecundity of the jiopulation and to what extent it represents a temporary change, later to resume a less precipitous but still a definite downward trend. At the annual meeting of the British Medical Association held at Cardiff in 1928 the falling birth rate was one of the central points of discussion. Professional men and Avomen from the fields of medicine and economics debated the in-obicm from various points of view. In summarizing the conclusions of this meeting the editor of the British Medical Jmirnal made the following statement concerning the birth rate: There is a liiw of population growth whicli occurs in cycles, following in the main a curve of a definite type. The hirfh rate is falling now because we are at the end of such a cycle, and it will not again rise until those factors which are at present over-riding the inherent tendency to increase are recog- nized and removed. Density is one of the controlling factors, but the estimate of density should be applied not oTily to a country, but to restricted localities, and must be judged, not by to^al numbers, but by the relation of such numbers to resource and opportunity. Voluntary control of conception has undoubtedly prevented the birth of many individual babies, but it may be doubted whether this has appreciably affected the crude birth rate or population growth cycle.* This statement somewhat ameliorates the concern of those who see in the present decline a sudden cessation in population growth. That birtli rates of California follow cyclical tendencies is emphasized by Figure 1 in Plate IV. Although California vital statistics have not been recorded in detail for a sufficiently long period to show complete cycles or to make possible ade(|uate comparisons with the census, it is l)0ssible, by malting apjiroximations of the numbers in different age groups of the population between 1920 and 1980, to estimate ap- proximately the number of children born per thousand women of childbearing age. While a high degree of accuracy is not claimed for llie es-timate thus made, the g(>neral trend in birth rate can be sliown. The numbers of children piM- lliousand Momen in the age groups If) to 44 rose from less than 60 in 1910 to more than 85 in 1924 and has since then been declining rapidly. This trend in birth rate, it must be under- stood, reflects not only changes in the birth rate for each specific age group, but is in a large measure a reflection of the shifts in age dis- tribution within that portion of the represented population. Even when birth rates are studied on the basis of five- or ten-year age groups, variations in age distribution wilhin those groups distort the birth rate and many wrong conclusions can easily be drawn in regard to its trend. More will be said of this trc^nd in birth rate in relation to forecasts of United States and California population. • Editorial. The Falllnp Birth Rate. Tlie British Medical Journal. Page 499. Sept. 15, 1928. RATE OK IRRU5ATION I»KVHU)I'MENT '29 I \ too NUMBER OF BIRTHS PER 1000 WOMEN BETWEEN THE AGES or 15 AND A^ IN THE CALIFORNIA POPULATION £ ao E ^ M 40 ricuDC 1 \ W;.i"g av«rag« — ' ^ Humbtr of b>rfKs ^ 1 1 ! r909 su I9t3 Year 024 1929 I9j ■ -/K ——■*"" 3 ^ c 30 £ 20 (0 Q H) y ^^— — ' — .^^^^ ""^^ 1 aot I9M t9<9 1924 r9» Ytar 30 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Mortality Rates. Specific luortcility rales do not iiivc so iiiucli li'ouble as birth rates in estiinatiiijr future ijopulatiou. lini)r()veiiH'iit in tlie deatii rate of cliiUlren, liowevcr, has an important effect in preventing a greater decline than wouhl have oIluMnvise taken place in the ratio of children to total population resulting from declining birth rates. Crude mor- tality rates on the other hand show variation, due not alone to changes in death rates in each sj)ecilic age group, but, like birth rates, also to material sliifts in the age composition of the poi)ulation. Not only does age composition of the jiopuhition have an important effect upon mor- tality rate, but the ratio of foreign to native elements in the pojnilation also has an impoi'tant influence. In Figure 2, IMate IV, are shown tiie numbers of deaths in Califoi-nia from 19()() to 1929, inclusive. In the same figure the trend in tlie population is shown.* In this figure careful observation will show that the two trentls are farther apart in the later years than in the early period, indicating an improvement in the crude rate of mortality. To what extent the improvement shown for the past decade may have been due to a more complete census in 1930 can not be easily determined. We are not confronted, however, with the erratic variation observed with respect to birth ]-ate. Net Reproduction Rate. Crude rates of natural increase, comi)uted on tiu' basis of differences between births and deaths and expressed as a percentage of the total ))opulation, are subject to the same errors involved in treating births and deaths separately in such a manner. t It became very important to consider the age com})osition of the female population in any long- l)eriod prediction of population growth. After applying such a detailed * Inasmuch as this graph is on a semi-logarithmic scale, if the trend in deaths were exactly parallel to the trend in population it would indicate an unchanging crude mortality rate ; that is, the ratio of the total number of deaths to the total population would remain the same. f A way out of the difficulty is proposed by Kuczynski as follows : "It became necessary, first, to ascertain on the basis of present mortality how many out of 1000 newly born girls reach childbearing age, that is, fifteen years, how many reach sixteen, etc., and finally how many pass throuKli rliildbearing age. that is, reach fifty years. This information is to be derived from the life table which for a given period exhibits the number of females surviving at the beginning of each year of age out of 1000 live-born, assuming that the mortality for each year of age was that of the period under consideration. "It becomes necessary, secondly, to ascertain the actual number of females living in each ytar of childbearintr age and the numlier of female births by years of age of the mcjther in order to compute the female fertility rate for each year of age, i. e., the number of female births for 1000 women fifteen to sixteen years, or 1000 women sixteen to seventeen years, etc. "It became necessary, thirdly, to apply those fertility rates to the number of women who according to the life talile would in a stationary population be fifteen to sixtei-n years of age, sixteen to seventeen years, etc. These numbers are derived from the number of female survivors by assuming that the women fifteen to sixteen years would be equal to tlie average of those surviving fifteen and those surviving sixteen years, etc. P.y multiplying the luimber of women of fifteen and sixtet'U yi'ars in the stationary i)opuIation by tlu- female fertility rate of the women of (ifli-i-ii and sixteen ye.ars, we find how many girls will be born to 1000 newly born girls at the age of fifteen to sixteen years (with present natality and mortiility). Hy a similar cDrnputation we find the lesults for the age sixteen to seventeen, etc. The sum of all the new fertility rates thus found will show the total number of females borne l>y the original stock of 1000 females. If this total is equal to 1000, the ])0|)ulation holds its own; if it is larger, the population increases; if it Is smaller, the population, in ease natality and mortality continue the same, is bound to die out. "This is the only accurate method of calculating a fertility table. The basic data needed for its compulation are a life table for females, the actual number of women for each vear of ehildbearing age, and the number of female live-born by years of age of the mothers." Kuczynski, It. H.. The Balance of Births and Deaths. Pages 42-44. The Mac- niillan Company, 1928. KATK OK IKUir.ATION DKVFI^I'MEVT 31 MIKllvslS l*> 111'' l>"|Ull.lt M'llS I'i I'.ll l«i|if 1\ IMV^N n^iv I im i| ii- 1 tl' i'> iiiili \U 'W'vsirru aiul Nnrthrni Kurnpf in \[V2t\, 1(M> nidtlirrs ^ravi- hirlli l(» H:i future mothers only. With thi* fertility of lil'Jti. the p(»|)u!ation is hotiiul to (lie out unh'ss mortality of potential mothers lieereases hcyotid rea^ionahle expt-rtatious. .\n•_>;. • How meaMiii«rless ditTtMent estimates of natural inerease for Cali- fornia have Ixvn ean only he appriH'iated hy a eonsiileration ctf immi- •^'lation. In a «liv«'MN.sion of l»;ilani'«' nf hirtlis jukI th'.iths- in the retris- •ration area of the rnit««| States the statemt>nt has hern nuide tiiat the ■■•rreatest exeess of births over deaths — ls.:{ per l(MM) population — appiars for I'tah, and the h)\vcst — .'M per KMM) population — appi-ars for California." ^ This li'/ure representin*/ California's natural increase has been subjected to nuieh nii^inti ipritati(Ui. It will be shown in a later parajrraph how immi^'ration. if it does not actually nuike osti- mat«^ of luitural inerease impossible, so obscures the fundamental ele- ments neeevN;iry for its calculation and use that the prediction of California population luvessarily must deviate in methoil from the use of devices devch»pe<| in recent investiLrations. whi«*h are so important with respect to the national populatioti problem. Immigration. Immij.'ratiun into a ciuinlry or into a .siatc is iiithn'iiced by ecunumie fonditi«)ns in the state (»r country from whence th(> immitrration came as well as within the area receiving' the immi^'rants. In studies of immigration into a country like the Cnited States it is possible to make u.s«» of the national immi':ratif>n statistics. In a state like (\iIifornia. w'x.j-e immigration is such an important factor in populatif)n. it .mi»s neees.sary to n'sort to a different method of estimating immi- gration. The iletails of the metluKl used in the present investigation will Im' deseribe«l in a later srction. At this point, however, it nd'-'ht b«' well to indicate how differently the immijjration problem must be approached when the analysis is made for a state or section of the ountry than when the entire population of the nation is under con- ideralion. Kor a state there are no immiL'ration statistics. Net .mmiirration «*an not Im' computed, therefore, on the basis of differences bet we. n annual immitrration and emigration. Figures have already be«*n (riven whi«'h show the importance of immi^rration in California ion u'rowth. An index of imtni'jration from other states and ■ I _ . countries is i^ss^'nlial. Such nu index •• "• ' instruct- ■! fmm (•ovulation tiirures an«l Jivailable mortality tal Application of the Foregoing to ■ Long-Time Population Forecast. .Many different methmls have been usetl to forecast poptdation. Dur- in>» the perii»d from one ••enstis to the next !■ ' » such ' "d enroll- !nent hav.' Ih'cu us«d. All such index«-s, In .. :, take -eeast up to the current year only. FonM-asts have b«»en made, h . by pro- jection of strait;ht lines into the future, startinc with past trends plotted ^-M'ction or -••midoj^anthmie paper. For short jM'ricMU such esti- ' i )•>■' !• r K'tc-i. . irth HtaUnttrii. Klflh Annual Ropnrt. 1>1». I'asx a. IT. 8. DvpC. • 'ommprce. U. ii. iiovt. lYInUng Offlce. 1»JI. 32 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES mates may have their application. Some refinements have been made in this kind of projection by the use of various mathematical curves. For a period of four decades, however, which seems the minimum for such an investisration, fuiidanuMital chanfres taking place in the compo- sition of the population make necessary a consideration of the factors discussed brieliy in tlie foregoing pages. A brief statement of how these principles have been applied by the Scripps Foundation of Miami University in estimating future population of the United States follows. A FORECAST OF UNITED STATES POPULATION Whelpton,* in estimating the future population of the United States, computed specific birth rates by a method which corresponds very closely to the proposal of Kuczj-nski except that instead of making his calculations for each year of age his rates apply to women in five-year age groups from 15 to 49 years of age. His observations of birth rate for specific ages of moth(M's over the pa.st 20 years indicate decreases per decade as follows : Urban Rural Native white 4.2 per cent 5.4 per cent Foreigrn white 5.0 per cent 6.6 per cent Negroes 3.8 per cent 6.2 per cent Looking into the future, average percentage declines per decade for the next 45 years are indicated for the same groups as follows : Urban Rural Native white 3.5 per cent 4.5 per cent Foreign white 5.C per cent 6.4 per cent Negroes 5.0 per cent 6.8 per cent These percentages have been computed by using the specific birth rates computed by Whelpton. t It will be observed that percentage decline in birth rate is not given for different age gi'oups. This is because for a given nativity class, either urban or rural, the percentage is the same regardless of age. This would indicate that in determining the trend in birth rates it was probably impossible to obtain the necessary data to take this further step in the calculation of specific birth rate. This is an important point with respect to interpretation of the adequacy of the birth rates employed by Whelpton, which are considered even by himself as being too high. On the basis of specific birth rates, trends in survival rates, modified by ex])erience in low-death-rate countries, and estimates of immigration all a])plied to 1920 population, which he previously had corrected for underenumeration, he estimates future United States population as follows: Year Estimated population 1940 138,250,000 I'.T.O 151,020,000 lOGO 162,670,000 1970 171,460,000 1975 175,120,000 While this estimate appears somewhat low to the more oi)tiinistic, it ehecks fairly elo.sely with widely quoted estimates made by llaymond •Whelpton, P. K., Pnpulatlr.n of the United States, 1925 to 1975. The American Journal of Sociology. Vol. XXXIV. Pages 253-270. Sept., 1928. f Ibiil. Table IV, page 262. RATE OK IRKKJATION 1>KVKIX)I'MKNT 33 IVjirl.* Altlmujjh IVnrl 's iiu'f Inwl i>f «»stimnti« has hern s^'vorcly friticizcd bocauso of his I'laiin to a \i\\\ of population jrrowth bascil upon biolojfical princMph*s of jrrowth of h)\vfr forms of lifo, hiH nuithoinaticnl curves (U a nunibor of ditToront popiilaf inns. Whi-tluT or not tho two nii-thods of forci-ast can b«' rro«»ncil('«l. that of Whi'lptnn sofpis to nvst upon principles which arc more easily cxplain<-(l and undcrstoml and are more nearly in accord with the methods developetl by Kuczynski and other recent invest ipators. That Wlu-lpton's ••stimate is not claimed by himself to be tlie last word in I'nited States forecast, however, is indieat<'d by his own statement that althouf;h "these estimates were published only about two years a^, we would probably obtain somewhat lower fijjures as to future populati«>n and birth rates if we wer»' calculating; them totlay. The dtvline in the birth rate since 1!>2() has continued at a more rapid rate than we anticipate«l when our computations were made. We do not have enough information to hazard any estimate of how much lower revised calculations would be, but we feel safe in sayinj; that our population ti^'ures are ipiite optimistic. " + S<'h(H>l enrollment statistics show a very sharp decline in the numbers of younper pupils, and calculattnl birth rates which purport to be specific birth rates by piven ape irroups have trivcji rise to much discussion about an early date at which the I'nited States will have a stationary population. Iveeent statements maile by w»'ll known writers indicate such a situation is possible with regard to our I'nited States population as early as I**?'). Attention already has b^'cn called, however, to the results of debate in Enirland upon the »*ribution will have an im ' 't etTect in the trend of the birth rate. iiirifis per KMM) wonu-n of i ... . aring age, on the other haiul, can be very greatly influenced by a change in the projMirtion of that number who are between the ages of 25 ami 3') There are important fluctuations in the ntnnbers m the ditTcrent ape groups in th»' -••••' ■';'i. The ctTeets of panics and warn reverberate through the p >. alternately showing up in tho numbers of childn'n and in tin- numbers of niother». A considerable |M>rcentage of the children of the I'nited Stat«"s to be born l)ctween i;>:{.'> and HMO will be grnI^! ' i . ..- i "vjndsfjns <■•' ''-e large nii'"'" '•- of children underlay. , were MteXi. by Alfrfxi A Kri'.pf. I;.- ^ -, „r^ , . t PcnNortAl letter un-L r 'la'c of Jun« 27. «^J0. from P. K. Wbalpton. 34 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1905 and l!)!-"). The ijreat-jrrand mothers of the 1940 babies vreve born in tlie United States or foreifrn countries before the Civil War. Their hiishjinds wore too y()unir own ]iojiulation growth will be affected in time by a diminished source of sui)ply of immigrants, and our natural increase will be influenced by the age and nativity of those coming to live amongst us. UATK OF fUnHJATION DKVKl^I'MKNT 35 CIIAI'TI'.K 111 AN ESTIMATE OF FUTURE CALIFORNIA Pr>PTTT atION Future (^ilifornia pnpulatioti iiu>rt*n.s«> will il<>pi-nt| upon a ct>iitinua- iioptdation in <'onsiderable detail. From these records it ap|)ears that in l!»'Jli:{. (,r 41 p«'r cent, who were born .:i nther states, and 7.')7.tJ'jr». or 2'2 per cent, who were b«)rn in foreiyn countries. By combining: the percenta;:*' coming from other siates with that of foreij:n-l)orn immijrrants it will be seen that in 1!>20 California • !s populated to the extent of (».'{ per cent by persons f)f iniinijrrant ::in. It appears likely that the fuuil results of the 1I>:{0 census • ; imeration will n'Veal an even jrreater portion of our total population of native or foreign iinmitrrant oritrin. In the de<'a0<» to IMIO more than hidf of the native white imnn- to California were born in eii»ht states, most of whii-h w • ■ ■ western states, includiti^ Illinois, btwa. KansiLs. Missouri ;i.'..i '• lo. In that de»>ad»' California immi^'ralion includeHM) native white |>enM»ns Inirn in Texas, and New York and Pennsyl- vania e;ieh contribut«'d II- ' ifi eipial r ' • In the deeade IHIO •<• r.eji) t)...... .-nil,, riirht ... . were the ...._ -t contrdiutors to Cali- Ilia p< ; -n. altiiniiuh the total imniit'ration coming from this - up was somewhat less than it had b««en in the previous de4>ade. Where thes«« ' livi*<| !M«tweeii the time of their birth ;i' i •!••• time of lu.n .i.ii>..i .- not shown i" •''•• eeiisiiM statistics, fr.-iu N^iueh. totrether with the us.- of mortality t. they were «lerivcd. An outstandini; character ; the entire mijrratory movement within •^ • Tiiited States diiniiL' tin- past two deea«les ) n the • '..'fd Call*' ■■ V • • '• of the miirrat<»rv n, nt fr Au\ ^;.ite in ; v will reveal California as the «; i. :JG DIVISION or WATKR RESOURCES ol" an iiuportaiit jiart of the I'lnigrants and where shifts have appeared in the mifrratory streams fi-om the various states they usually have shown a balance in the direction of California. Tiiat it is i)()ssible for a state to have its stream of immigration suddenly reduced may be well illustrated in the case of the state of Washington. In the decade 1900 to 1910 more than three times as many people took up their home in that state as in the following decade between 1910 and 1920. This is something to consider in the interpre- tation of the estimates which follow concerning the future immigration into California. The important observation to be made, however, is that the numbers of pe()i)le entering into the migratory movement in the I'nited States as a whole has exceeded o, 000,000 i)ersons for the two decades under consideration. Indications are that in the past decade, 1920 to li):]0, more people were on the move than in either of the two previous decades. California's share in this stream of migration will be dependent to a great extent upon the o])portunities which she can continue to offer. Table 1 and I'late V present the historical picture of the nativity composition of California population at each census enumeration, 1870 to 1920, with an estimate of the nativity composition in 1930 based upon preliminary census returns indicating approximately 5,650,000 for the state total. All signs point to an increase in the rate of growth of the California-born ])ortion of the i)0])ulation during the la.st decade. In the face of this, the immigrant ])ortion appears to have soared to greater heights. The rate of immigration is increasing so rapidly that despite an apparent increasing rate of growth in the indigenous popu- lation it is forced into an ever smaller proportional place in the total. Measured in terms of absolute quantity or by relative standards, immigration to California has been, up to the present, truly a rising tide. Net Effective Immigration. In order to avoid confusion with the term ordinarily u.sed to indicate the difference between numbers of persons immigrating and those emigrating the descriptive phrase net effective immigration is used. Its jnirpose is to designate the number of persons who have come into the state and have survived and remained to the end of the decade, in excess of those of the California population who have moved away. This index of immigration not only makes use of available statistics to advantage, l)ut. as the phrase indicates, truly represents that part of llie immigrant ])opulation which is etT'ective in increasing its numbers. It has been computed l)y five-year age groups of male and female, and of foreign and luitive, for four decades, 18S0 to 1920. inclusive. In addition, estimates liave been made for the decade 1920 to 1930 with no attempt to make se]>a)-ati' estimates for the native and foreign ])ortions of the po])uhit ion. On the basis of the estimates for these five decades net effective immigration has been computed without segregation into age groups for the two decades 1860 to 1870 and 1870 RATK OK IKRItJATION' I>KVKl/>PMKNT 37 TABi.l I ^ V 1 1\ in CX)MPOSITtON OP CALIFORNIA POPIAJVTION \c»t Total popukuoD Cdtfcr-o Varrign loimicimnt ■ ■.U) ,V t • 1 - 1- -la 345.IJ20 1 -.13 1 1 1 1 «.• •■ . i .■ - . t ■ i.:>4.>().• Tabh' _: >iiniiii.ii i/r> ilir fst iiiiat cs t»l" total nrt ctTcctivr immi^rratioji into t'alit'ornia l)y ton-year a;:«' ^Toiips from lf>>() to VJ'\0. ini'liisivo. The same data ronverteil to perceutapo of the total iinnii- pration H> years of ajre ami over are shown in Table '.\ IMate VI. whieh is haseil upon Tal>lis *J aiul :{. prev.iii> n.i .ihiiiv.- iiurnipration each tleeatle from 1>S0 to W^'M). se;:re^'atefl into ten-year ape proups. The most slrikinp fact broupht out by this plate is in the ape composition of this net «'(Tcctivc immipration. More than 6H per cent of th.' immipraiits in eaeh deeade have been under 4" years of au'e. The averape ape of immiirrants durinp the deeatle l^*^() to 1>'M) was '2^i years, in the next deeade inereasinp to 27 years. The decade 1JH)() to 1910 witne-sed the larpest proportioiud shift to the oltler ape proups and r.ii>e4l th»' averape to '.V2 years. In bast two «leeades the averape ape of immiprants has In'en M years. Tiiis is a rellection of the chanpes in composition of the national popidation. Despite this temleney of the averape ape to rise, due to the numbers of older persons havinp a laru'er pereentaL'e in the distribution of total net efTeetive immipration. the younper proups continue to comprise the numerical and proportional suprenuicy. This is a demonstration of what has already been stated. California is not beinp populated throuph the ir' 'ion of the advanced in ape, those past the prinie of lif«' who It ;e to spen-' t'"!'- declininp years in a friendly climate. These come too in an inc: • stream, but they have been, and probably will ritinue to W. a minor part of the total. Trend in th« S«x Ratio. The ratio of nun to woni'^n in the immipration stream has In-en a ' ". '^'antly shiftinp fipure. F!•• hail Ix-t^n to nubtrart from th«« r«niiuii prtpuln(|i>n of r. r.i ...... ,. • »!.. ...1 . * .. .1 I.. .1... .....I...- .? .1. ,. ■ r f I' I. il it ■ n 'Ch iit<

o — rsjro o C o c O fO D Q. O CL 1920 1930 CALIFORNIA POPULATION TRENDS SHOWING PROPORTIONS WHICH ARE CALIFORNIA. MATIVE OTHER THAN CALIFORNIA AND FOREIGN BORN. KATK OK IKKICATION I)K\ KUII'MKNT .'W TKBLt i Tl"»l \I NI 1 ; 1 I\!\!l( ;RAII0N into (ALIFORM a. IIISO-14JO V«»tt«mp utttCW 4.1 4. * vl 1 '.11 U.i4l 741 I.3S4 MS 1. .,.*-■ 23a.743 1--. ii-i 734 lii.i*;.' 14.67V Totek • 1: 1 1 r'.r.Tn * Ficorw m bch tfan * rc | >f« wt it m* bacrcaw lor tb> ikcMi*. TABLL J PERCENTAGE AGE niSTRIBUr!'>N O'? TOTM. NKT EFFECTIVE IMMUJRATION INI. I-I9J0 Af^ ffTOQp ; * vjl • . ' * ■ •.. 1910 1910 to 1020 1930tol9M 4 ■ « 4: 4 .M 49 47 13 •s ., 17 i 04 > H 7 17 47 W 17 33 33 24 47 12 89 5 65 480 1 35 46 OK 100 Oil Iv ly 23 62 20 M 13 21 S 19 !>1 09 !<■) Ill 13 7S 27 65 29 05 14 93 9 05 2 64 1 40 62 84 Took • ■ 100 00 •lOOpw •FVgvna la botdlac* rvpnaMi act Jui wwi (or i- the numlxTS of childrt'ii. Tabu's 4 and .'1 jjiw CNtiniatcs of net effective :!iirni}rratinn and the percentajre distribution of iinini^rration by ten year tiling t«» s«'X. It will b»' notierd that in the 1..;- . ..... • •' wotiM'ii more ni-arly tMjuals that of men. In I ver. the pereentu^es of m«n b<'tween thr a'_'«*s of 'Jtl and '.i\f wer»' niueh greater than those of tlie women. T" • M th»' perei-ntap" of women :' ■ ...; >■: \\ir mm. and in the deeade l*"'! '.■ I' '< jin aetual exiNliis of nativr-born men in he Hgr jrronps t)4'tw««<'n M) and (»•">. there wa.s still a net balance of ition liy \v '"" inen-a'.infr ratio of wom«-n to men has to .. ......ill .•»'■•• of the T ''•.•• intlm'iie«'s wl'--'- vre rerlaii<'«- ly willi n'sprff . M ill till' pop;....;. ;.. but alwt with ■ lure trend in mortidi»y rati-v, in thf trend in Ihe ratio id tin- iniiniMTs of fori'ijfn ijorv. nativ** anions thos<' ■|i, . ■ . Wt ffT • " ha^f '"' • Te I' "■' "id « : .. ;y. Tl 'i- li ;id 7. the latter ^'ivinjr thi' p« »e 40 DIVI>~ION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate VI NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION INTO CALIFORNIA DURING THE PAST FIVE DECADES BY TEN YEAR AGE GROUPS (agls undlr ten not included) 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-59 70-79 80-89 Age groups PERCENTAGE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION INTO CALIFORNIA 1880-1930 (net effective immigration ten years of age and over = 100 PER cent) 20-29 30-39 AO-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 Age groups KATK OK lUKItiAIUiN IM.M l.«>iM r.s i 41 TAIU.i: 4 NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION INTO ( Al 11 ORNIA. SI(;RI (;ATI O ACCORDINC; TO StX. IMO-IHJO' Avroop ■ 1900 f . ■ Mdr 10 19 •' t.M 3S.403 M.7|fl '•<(«l 1 1. r4- S> ."■> ■ II 34.344 r.i.'.Ki '-■4 JO JV NO IM06 IH..V»4 .>.jr3 4»4» ' «.' m U.897 5i.0M SOM 2.601 ^> *n Ml S.MI B.S44 MOB m nv 4M 4W 1.436 3.U4 4.316 »• 133 134 .100 3VI 6.073 MkVloUb 131.140 77. 4(1. ■ ii3.au MOlSSS 064.443 Ftiml* 10 19 :^^'ii Kao7 57.0M 73.060 105. IS7 :«> .■■■ ». , t »• tt.3M 97.047 111.431 300.su .; 1 , M "-Vl II.I3S «UIO s:.i02 314.033 ♦0 49 >":4 7.6I8 S6.78S 53.058 109.745 JOM .•4 a.gs4 loina 35.760 74.800 «0 M : 'JI 4.172 14468 36.856 34.031 TO 79 ] ■-•'> 1.717 6.756 11071 1X004 mi)') 564 7U MI !■ • 1.870 S«8 3.504 443 0.086 /• 7.706 rtamirXoUk ».■' 3M.a84 404J8S 773.396 r^ntnd Ui^k 314.404 149.574 718.6a 796.411 1.757.739 ' For Mctbod of niruhtion ww Tat4.ii l.\ to 9 K. AptModix A. ' Tigtvci IB boldface rrprrsrol tyrt A.--,-x^ f.w tli.- .)«eade. TABLE S PERCENTAGE ACE DISTRIBUTION OF NET EFFECmVE IMMIGRATION INTO CALIFORNIA. SKJRHGATED ACCORDING TO SEX. I88O-I9J0 Actroop IViOtu H90 1890 to 1000 1000 to 1010 lOIO to 1030 1030 to 1930 NUt* 10-19 30 01 39 93 16 14 30 16 UM 3»vr) 4<) IS 44 37 34 06 39 71 99 00 v, ■, , .'.I 'XI 30 43 36 40 30 13 30 06 «■• «• 4 M 039 13 89 13 09 15 SO J" '. 1 1 09 <9n 4 69 7.63 R 44 <■<> <■. , 4 06 900 491 9 17 t 10 »-rt 39 1 n 000 3 44 083 8IM9 M 064 034 74 43 ••+. n ;o 17 07 07 71 Touk 100 ai 'too no luo 00 100 00 too 00 FMml* 10^ 10 . . 39 35 30 04 30 09 19 37 13 90 JMO S3 06 It 7« 30 67 37 67 36 94 Jr> V, i: 11 14 90 81 64 31 64 r 75 41% «. 't u 989 13 03 13 33 14 10 4 30 8 01 7 13 a a> 81 4 43 5 39 606 6 48 453 , 1 77 3 10 303 309 3 33 »i% *v OS 005 069 089 086 ■ (»i 100 00 • inopw •lOOpM I 4. ■ 4. 42 DIVISTOX OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 6 NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION INTO CALIFORNIA, SEGREGATED ACCORDING TO NATIVITY, 1880-1920' Age group 1880 to 1890 1890 to 1900 1900 to 1910 1910 to 1920 Native 10-19 37,124 43,423 18,524 7,309 878 3,963 628 598 182 37,445 21,136 ^,957 12.802 8.792 1,645 294 673 157 88,300 121,083 89,235 5.5,161 29,948 21,662 7,155 1.795 209 117,048 20-29 136,904 30-39 100,971 40-49 74.154 50-59 - 48,.'?51 60-69- .35,160 70-79 - 15,586 80-89 - 4,125 90+ 336 Native totals 112,629 14,683 48,945 27,810 7,107 145 5,183 431 434 99 32,211 12,564 38,447 33,888 20,712 7,733 9,596 1,035 581 108 414,548 34,442 117,660 86,639 37,504 10,637 12,806 2,522 1,511 353 532,641 Foreign 10-19 35,609 20-29 90.741 30-39 - 64,804 40-49— 30.808 50-59 - 16,773 60-69 15,194 70-79- 6,029 80-89 2,324 90+ . . . 398 104,837 124,664 304,074 262,770 217,466 156,875 718,622 795,411 ' For method of calculation see Tables l.\ to 0.\, Appendix A. ' Figures in boldface represent net decrease for the decade. TABLE 7 PERCENTAGE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION INTO CALIFORNIA, SEGREGATED ACCORDING TO NATIVITY, 1880-1920 Age group 1880 to 1890 1890 to 1900 1900 to 1910 1910 to 1920 Native 10-19 32.96 38.55 16.45 6.49 0.78 3.52 0.56 2 53 0.16 116.24 65 62 '21 80 39 74 27 30 5.11 91 2.09 0.49 21.30 29.20 21.53 13.31 7.22 5.23 1.73 0.43 0.05 21.98 20-29 25.70 30-39 18.96 40-49 13.92 50-59 - 9.08 60-69 6 60 70-79 2.93 80-89 - 77 90+ 0.06 Native totals 100 00 14.01 46.69 26 53 6.78 14 4 94 41 0.41 0.09 =100 00 10.08 .30.84 27.18 16.61 6.20 7.70 83 47 09 100.00 11.33 38.69 28 49 12.33 3 50 4 21 83 .50 .12 100 00 Foreign 10-19 13. 5.1 20-29. 34.55 30-39 24 66 40-49 - 1 1 76 .50-59 ti 38 60-69 5 78 70-79 80-89 90+.-. 2 29 .88 .15 Foreign tutulji . .... 100 00 100.00 100 00 100 00 ' Figurcjt in iKjldfiice represent net dccreime for the decade. > 100 per cent^32,2I 1. Sec Talile 6. KATK UK IKRHiATmN I>F.VKIX1PMENT 43 ilistrihiitioii of tin- jictuail niiinlnis shown in tin- fornjcr. Tin* iniiiii irrntion of native-horn imlinU's many nioro nn«l«'r tin* imrn of 20 than rn-lM)rn. Thf striking' ffatnn* of thrsr tahh>s, howrver. is th«« fa»'t that in the i"»i l...ifi .•..i.tlrni..! t,. i-i.nii- in fonsitlfrabh' nujuhers. Fumx IStJO to IM'JO th«' pt'rr»'ntam' of native horn. i. r. born in thr I'nito*! States, in the total California population inereased from slitrhtly more than tJO per eent to nejirly X) per eent. During' the same peritwi the p«reenta^e of native -horn in the iinmitrrant population inereased • ven more rapiilly. With the exception of the deeade iSiK) to 1!M)() the ratio of native to foreijrn in the n«'t efTeetive itmnijjration had a corre- spondinjr increase. All of these shifts have hail a resultant .fT.-.t it, mortality rates and in the trend of a^e distribution. Ratio of Urban Population to Rural. From ll*(H) to IH'JO the pere«'nta<.'e ot the California population which •^ urban increa.vd from ."»lV4 per cent to ()S per cent. It is a well known •act that the number of rtiral person.s in a population jrreatly affects Its rate of j:riiwth because of the hijrher birth rate in tin- rural areas. There are many towns in California liaviri}; less than *J.')(M) inhabitants which would coiiw under the ci'iisus classilieation of rural but which are more urban in their characteristics than rural. We are therefore without af the causi-s of low birth rate, and it may have had an important * '' Immiu'ration. however, has undiiubte«lly been of far ^reat'i , > e in this respect. With our present knowled're • f the trentls in the rural-urban ratio it 8e«Mns probably the best way ■ <{ treatintj it in our analysis of population prowth to make no attempt to separate the effeet of ••han^r*^' in the rural-urban rati*) from those due til (itli.r i'nu«;.> Relat on o^ Onitcci btat«» Population Increase and Not EHvctivo immigration Into California. Nearly half of the inere«.He in the number <»f males In'tween the ajjes i>f 20 and :{() in the Cnitetl States |>(»pulation between r.MO and l!t2n ame to California. Strikinjf as this fact is, the truly si^rnitlcant point IS the rrns^m for t! ' h piTeentajre It is hijrh. n«>t Immvius.' the numlH-r oi malfs imi mt; '<• Cjdifornia de|mrted sharply upward from the trend, hut iNt-aiiNe the increase in the |>opulation of the I'nited States as a whole was small. Immigration to California Continued Along Ita Eatabliahad Trend Oeapite a SHortag* in Unitad Stataa Incraaa*. !• iL'uri's 1 and 2 of I'late Vll ite the phrn- iiiereas** in till' r.itio of <*•' = '■ •' immiKi ' ■ T'-i. ' .s;..;,, population DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate VII MALE IMMIGRATION TO CALIFORNIA AS A PER CENT OF UNITED STATES INCREASE 60 50 i*0 c o 30 CD a. 20 10 FIGURE I -8- 20-23 A^e ^roup NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION TO CALIFORNIA BY 10 YEAR AGE GROUPS EACH SHOWN AS A PERCENT OF UNITED STATES POPULATION INCREASE IN THE SAME AGE GROUPS c Per cer O U1 o < 10-19 20-29 30-39 ■ - Ill ■ ■ I 1 ■ 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 Age groups 90-99 c 03 o 100 70 50 40 30 20 10 Q- 7 NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION TO CALIFORNIA ALL AGES 10 AND OVER AS A PERCENT OF UNITED STATES POPULATION INCREASE AGES 10 AND OVER, SHOWING FUTURE POSSIBLE TRENDS - ' « _ - riGURE 3 - - - - - - y/^- I > y \ \ / : \ A O-r-A^ :v:":-:-:-;':-:-:-:i .V.V.-.V.V.h ' / _ y - jT - - y ^»w - - A <^ ^ - - ^y "^ - - y ~~' : y - I y; ♦ "2 r t / / / s y^ / / / \ / / / ■^ ■-,, / / / - 1670 IB80 1890 1900 1910 I9E0 Year 1930 . 940 I9S0 I960 1970 KATK UK IKKKiATloN UKVKMM'MKST t'» inorras*". Fi^'iir.' 1 sluiws how oii" |inrti(MilHr ap' and wx jfnmp sponded to n flrolinc in tho rnto of incn'nse of Unil«' ii.n. . .-m..iii«'d, in rolatioji to I'nitt'd Stat«»s population iniMtMso for lln- sanio j,'roups. f Althou< » .hm i mi :ii the «.' I The nurnerieal size of this in»n»it;ratiuii eoutinues. i _ lelation to I'nited States popidation incn»nse rises as the decline in the rate of inerease of I'nitetl States populatit»n hceonies more pronouneed. United States population inerease tliei-ffore ean only show the a|iproxiniate limits of net elTeetive immi;;iatii>n in tlie future. The point sli(ud«l not he over- lookeon United States population inerease. It is with the fu!' m m tiicM- laet.s mat tlie pereLiita^.;'-' wI'M'h California " ••■ luinratioji bears to Uniteil States popu- !.i: on iner.a>e. 1 :i projected into the future. Upon the basis of •his estimated future trend and the estimates of future United States '! • vcn in a . n«'t effective imnuLrration has ;,,., |. [lii,, I l.'i\ii rif \ .1 r' ;i t 11 il I ill I'l"!!!"!' .'* .\!i<. Ill 10-YLARt.i IN Aftcwwr l«Ota l«B l»aou>i9to 1910 lo 1930 l9»ialflS0 . +■■ , .s c: " ^M^ 2 U 20 31 * i 1 X. 4 0." 1 il « M 4 t2 •« OH 4 •.'. 4 :>< i ■1 ft (. 1 1 2 V> J 10 «, • m . 4 " H 111 Teuh II a ■'I *« t •■ Jl JM »|M| Ul I II til t4?( I Jlf tH-^ -t^JV'IV 46 DIVISIOX OF WATER RESOURCES Plate VII. ill wliicli {'stimates of iiiiinip:ration are shown for each of the next four decades. The c.rfrrvir upper limit is ba.sed n])on judjr- meiit ;is lo liow inueh of the Tnited States inereast^ iiiitrht possibly be diverted to California over a period of a few decades. The extreme lower limit is based upon jnd.Lrment as to how radical a decline in iinmifrration we niijrht expect and upon the probable future trend of the California fruit industry. Attention has already been called to the sudden curtailment in the immigration to the state of Washington. No such curtailment has been anticipated even in the lowest estimate of future iininigration to California. This does riot mean that such a curtailment is not possible. Between these two extremes are given two estimates of immigration which in the light of available information seem to indicate the reason- able limits of variation. The reasonable lower limit calls for a further increase in immigration during the current decade of 476,000, while the reasonable upper limit calls for an increase of 640,000. Each is smaller than the increase of the past decade. Table 9 gives the data forming the basis of constructing the trend of net effective immigration, while Table 10 contains the resulting pre- diction of immigration. The lower estimate anticipates an increase of another half million during the next decade and a slight increase in the next, followed by a decline. Nothing short of a business depression as serious as the one in tlie nineties is likely to bring about a sudden decline in immigration. Let it be understood, however, that such a condition is possible. In fact, such a depression seems to be in the making at the present time. In the face of the present economic condi- tions let it be emphasized that no attempt has been made to forecast cyclical variations. The population estimates given here are trend values only ; the figures for any given year may be higher or lower than the trend, as economic conditions change. The Future Survival Rate. It has been stated that the prediction of California population growth has been carried out in three steps for each of four decades. The first of these was the calculation of probable net effective immigration for ages of 10 years and over. The other two were the determination of num- bers of survivors at the end of the decade of those living in California at the beginning. of the decade, and finally the calculation of numbers of children.* Trends in the numbers of California tloatlis in relation to the rate of California i)opu]ation have already been discussed in connection with Plate 1\'. it lias l)een obser\'ed that the number of deatlis iucrea.sed at about the same rate as the population from 1910 to 1920, but between 1920 and 19;i0 there was an apparent improvement in the mortality • Estiinatfs of n«t fffcctivf immigralinn have involved the ii.se of .survival rates for the individtial aRe groups. Crude survival rates for the entire population 10 ycar.s of age and over can be readily determined from these. The ideal method of calculation would be by age proups. However, limited time and the fact that the uncertainty of ImmiRration already has" introduced a certain amount of error into the estimate, and indications that the application of the crude survival rate will inv4T OF IJNITI O STATfcS INCJti ASF IN POPliI ATION. IBM) TO ISJO . .' ,1 4 \mt 10 r— nut pofNtUtioo 1" > '-.i.-i >^ •(r Ukl orar imn 3 M of foiumn 2 i » <' ..... . ; - " ' it;.4(0 w(iul»i have pro- 1 i.'ixl the siune result, however. Attention has l)cen called to the fact that clianjfes in the composition of the population may also chanjjc tlie mortality rate. An important consideration in projecting the survival ra*e of the portion of the population which excludes children born .iinjr the deeade. U that mo^t of the improvement in mortality rates • lurinj? the past decade has been in the first .rear of life, and so far as the United Stat«s as a whole is concerned there has actually been a •^ack.* Any • vrnn'nt in the erudf mortality rate in the popu- iiMon livinj; in " rnia at the bej^inninjir of the decade must there- fore have come from reduced proportions of foreipiicrs and decreased pereentatre of males. These, on the other hand, have been ofTset by increased av. - - nf tiie population. As a result the crude survival rate has not I'inj; the past several decades by more than al)out I per cent. Sun'ival rates applied in the estimates for the next four decades ^ive from ^T.'JK) to ss,()0() survivors at the end of a decade for ••ai'h KMl.JMK) livint: at the b«i;innini» of the decade. The results of applyin;: lh»*se to the e.stimate of future California population are summarize*! at the end of this chapter. How Many Children Will Ther« B« : How many of our childp-n undi-r 10 years of age were born in Cali- fi.riiia and how m ' ' n brought here by thrir i - w«' «lo '■ ^ ' -' ■"• (•.-..-M^ . . jn)l reveal this proportion .... '" \i''I do not extend over a jwrioil > lone to mak«' p a reliable estimate. It makes little djiYerence, ht'wrver. ' ' t«» the ■ ith their i ' \\ '-re born ...•., .. .. ^ :; . .:i all ei ..;.: ., As to ■ exfimate, if we can determine how many children can be e . ! in proportion to the numb«T of women of cliildlM^arintf age, then we can t- I. A ■ •rt«IHr- Ain««rlr«n Journal of Public lU*..... , .1 XIX. v.. 48 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Z o O H Z z o H < a: a rn CO > < H H O w b b u H u Z •1 :a •-■ 1 pi] Per cent of United States increase 6 1 te < U3 CO to a •M-:^ cs tea u o )o ' to •« . *! o ! s : •a 1 C o •*A -^ CO o lo ! CO »'«' • CO > o> • .-H . ^H 1 o ' § i 00 1 "1 o !•* ' CO itO . CI 'CC ■ S ; <*9 a i o lo 1 T-^ 1 04 1 § ; S i ■S-5 2 "1 1 OS "-^ I CO Its ■ C4 • o E t ■i 1 a i X = 1^ fe.^.S ^5 o io 1 i-l iC« 1 o s a Q. c to iiO •-< CI i — a o {» 1 1^ CO ' ^ OO o 00 7 ■§ = ^ Ico — Id 00 CO § >- i e 2 9 d c > i i 4 c UATK OK IKKKiATlON HKVKUH'MKNT 49 count iho woiiu'U aiul from tlicir mimlxT cstiinnto tlio umnhor of cliililriii. Estimatfs Iuto jjivi-n for m-t «tT«'rtiv«' iinmii;rati<»n fXfhide this first ton-yoar apo proup bt'i-aus*' of the diflii'iilty of wparatinp inmiipration from ('aliforniaborii for apos iniilt»r 10 y«'ars, and hccatise of th(> possibility of estimating the number of theso chiMrrn l)y a more satisfactory methoti. In TabK' 11 and Kipuro 1 of Plate \ III the numbers of children per 1(HH) women of ehildlM-arinp ape are piven f«»r several decades in the past. In order to results. has been usihI. F^stimates of populaticui for apes 10 and over were nuide aecordinp to methods describe. This trend is shown in Table 11 and Kipure 2 of I'iate VIII. Ilavinp carried throuph the calculations for each decade to 11)70, the female population was estimated by ape proups for that year and the nundM>rs of children per 1000 women of chihlbearinp ape c<»mputed. This was checked for consistency with the trend in that ratio for the earlier tlccades. The result is shown in Table 11 ami Fipure 1 of Plate VIII. T.\Bi.i: II ( JIILI) PDPLXATUIN OF C Al IFORNIA LNIM H 10 Yl ARS OV AGK IN PI R CI NT OF TOTAL CALIFORNIA POl'LLATION ANO IN RLLATK)N TO Niviai jis OF WOMEN OF CMILDBI ARING AGE ! . ' a 1 , Oiild 4 ' S Y«M 1 hi. ! T.*»I pofniUtioD fVmjiloi, ;ir»{Ki;jfct;or.. 1 i'.JarWM 0-V. »» t»f wnt »tn 00 MtraO W pofiaklioa popuUtJoo IS- JO IS «0 lao ' m.vr: WiM* 11 t4 l8S4St NO IM> IS M »3JU 77J ino. 4 17 71 377 WW 7« 1*10. Mi^i :a::M9 15 M I aoo ino UCIM 3.43Mei Itt 23 •II MM • 'I •**" ktaojtn U W |.«dj.y,ii •u ESTINUTFD FUTURE TREND Tw • T . 1 V to mo IB>SO IMO.. wn.. IJHIOM II.4a4 I lo totoi pacnii xw |4^«daMi2ilOO I 4 b Ct«a Ik* U. a. Cmhw. Um 1990 Mmi havliv (am artxaMlMl oe liw r*>M ■< o^- •-— • if tmtmt^^ «i dblrib«lln of Ika >■— h petiwhitoa orw 10 ymn at mp Cobtmm 4 wt, tmieahl-i tram tUmm ta laai I aad 7. T»14t U Cnt^imM 7 (roai Tkhte 11. iMi • M fraai f^w* 2. PWl« V II aad «W •• •r'al •« aolaaHi 4 drriddl by tatamm 7 alMva. 4— » baa ba» ti^liil am Om btrnt CL o O E 400 200 FIGURE '\ 1 \ ^ -— - ' 1 - - - 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 Year 1940 1950 I960 1970 TREND IN THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN THE CALIFORNIA POPULATION EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL POPULATION, 1880-1930, WITH ESTIMATE OF FUTURE TREND TO 1970 ^ 24 d. o o. 20 CO c n ♦- 4 o 1- 9> JD F 3 Z FIGURE 2 ■ " ■-^*»^^--. -., - - - « - - 1 - leao 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 Year 19-40 1950 i960 1970 i:.vn; or iijunJArmx diaki.oi'mk.nt 'iI T\w computation of iitiiiibors of woiin'ii in 1070 was Imscd upon tln' triMuls in tin* pon'««nfHi»«' »iir«* nls«» an* sh«>\vn in Kiirnn' 1. tin* pcn-fnlau"' aire liistrihntitin of thi> total California population 10 \<-ars of a^;*' ami iivir. and in Kijruri' .'I. tlio California popuhition 10 yoars of ajje and over as a per font of tho total California population. 'Phis last curve is based up»»n the rati()s of childrrn to total population. Its purpose is to dct«rniine total popidation direct fnun populatitm 10 years of aire and over without poin>» thronirh the intcnne wotdd rise to more than 1.:{(M),t;0 ami 1970 to about SOO.(MM). This would brinj; the net efTective i" "''rafion up to more than tiv«' million persons, or about as many as 1 into th«' interstate nn>;ratory movement in the entire United States Ivtween 1910 and 1020. anMl. At the (»ther extreme, for those who an* very conservative, an estimate is uiven. basrd Upon the premis4> that ina*>n)ueh as population growth has increased at al>out the same rate as the increase in acrcajre and pro- •tion of California fruits that it will cojuinue to do so. This would ih in a population in 1M70 of about ll.lOO.(KK). Such a rate of _ wth would nM|uire a net effectivp immitrration during; the current de<-ade of 1.4()0,o70. The v.riter believes this is too r..n-.i rv .iiiv ■• and tluit idthouu'h the fruit indu.stry is one of California iries, the inevitable decline in the rate of its (jrowth will undoubtedly be ofTscl to .some extent by the O u o <; b O w < m Z o < a> O < Z a o b ^— I .J < u w H b o O u u o < w I o n z o H cn H CO Q U O < H Z U) U OS w o s o QO 00'- '^ O O) O) 0> O) o> o H gs — i r5 •si 2a o Y* IS o" '- c c.S O ^ O I-.. _•> « E c 8 PERCENTAGE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF CALIFORNIA POPULATION TEN YEARS OF AGE AND OVER MALE AND FEMALE O; ricu«r 1 ,^_^-v^ . - V 20 21 ^Z^^ ^ • ^^'^ . i(ti i5 - J i i — 1 -^ i 'a... ^ , .■.-9.; , — % OK C o re 16 Q. o °-.2 re E V "^ 6 V- O FEMALE \, I ; r 1 r. 1 1 o r > N Sy Afri 10 19 -c i *t« •• , ^ ' ^^"■'"^ A(r-. ^' \& j^y^ -I-. *33-6? . ■ Per cent .-^^ • ; - 1 ?0 . ' ■ ' ■ '■• W-89 ^ • :o *w iMO !«« •>:■: Censui Years <»« CALIFORNIA POPULATION TEN YEARS OF AGE AND OVER AS A PER CENT OF TOTAL CALIFORNIA POPULATION SHOWING ESTIMATED FUTURE TREND c L. Q. WO -.0 \ -- 60 TO 60 ^^^^' 1 ««0 «90 ttOO fVb Year l«40 -1*0 (DO 54 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 12,500,000 in 1950; bcfwecn 11,500,000 and I G .7 .-,0 ,000 i» I960, and hffween 17,000,000 and 20.500,000 in 1970. Tlu' estimate calls for an inereaso in net effective immigi-ation for the current decade of about half the increase of the past decade. This would mean that ('aliforuia iniuii^ration -would be between 16.3 and IS.O per cent of the estimated increase in I'nited States i)opulation. While this is somewhat p-eater than the corresponding percentage for the past decade, it is justified on the basis of the following evidence: 1. An upward trend in the ratio of California immigration to United States population increase extends through many decades of the past. 2. There is a probability of a temporary increase in the number of children per 1000 in the United States population during the latter part of the current decade and the early part of the next. 3. The large reservoir of population upon which California draws for its supply of immigrants will be only slowly affected as a source of Cali- foi-nia innnigi-ation by a reduction in the rate of increase of the United States population. 4. California's resources of land, water and water power, while affected in their value by trends in the markets for the products derived from them and by increasing costs of development, are still far from being exhausted. 5. Advantages for industry and commerce are increasing. H. The widely advertised advantages of California as a place of resi- dence will continue to operate toward an increase in the westward trek. 7. The country to city migration and business depression in the east will ]irobably continue for some time to increase the supply of oppor- tunity seekers. Just what effect business depression may have upon migration is not known, however. During the early land-settlement movement a wave of migration swept westward at each period of hard times. The difficidt times of 1.^73 were acconii)anied by a relatively heavier migra- tion to California than was the case during the hard times of the nineties. The answer today probably may be found in the relative severity of the depression in different parts of the country. In a previous paragra])h it has been stated that no attempt has been made to forecast deviations from the ]n-edicted trends. If jioinilation falls below the estimates given because of economic conditions, experience of the ]iast shows that the return of good times will make up for the loss by a more than noi-mal immigration. With this again impressed upon the reader's mind, he may find interest in the details of the four projected ])opulation estimates given in Table 13 aiul illustrated in Plate X. KATK OK lllUIiiAl ION l>| \ K.I,<>I*MKN 1 TAlitl. a 1 s 1 1 M \ 1 ! n n Ti T ■ ' IFORNIA POPl'l \TIOS 1'.'. T ■ IMiV •SANDS lttIOIol»«0 IMO lo IttSO IMO lu IMO 1960 lo 1970 &U0 7.«» in •.000 10.100 .'■'"•'■ I '»f •7.700 87.ilOO 88.000 88.000 ■•■ .■ki.l .»\«*r •.OM 7.910 8.900 1 1 «M '«ao •MO I MtO 7.910 •370 9.440 : AiU i.\. "« t M6S 84 90 88 00 9.000 latoo 11.100 lt«>4jmrmKl r ifiw*»r iimil VUO KiM It.UO I4.3» \^ 100.000 ror t: :iii» 97.900 88,000 88.000 /* ftnd ovw «'.V) 7.4S0 10.140 12.800 4 iJ30 3.M4 2.177 I.&78 7. ISO 9.8M 12.317 14.378 • -^ 84 90 85 00 .... . . ;ii H.5» 18.900 Kra.-oiL»lilf upper limit xtMm hrt]fuant at At*mik . &.&M) 8.700 12.300 18.770 vl-^» ^ .♦* . —i (V ': r-ttr- t ..-r 1 mi 1 kti f ,v • <) 87.900 88.000 88.UU0 M r.AA. ;•', ,i»'.:or. ^ -.,. ::.vin 11.700 yi.3oo Kttn-mr upper limil 19.140 • 1 88.000 88.000 I .n \^ » M 11.300 4.731 18.840 3.324 -- . 4.. ...aM l«.22t 22.3M ■ •• Cf»*«» '1* ?^ * * !l'T'"l» fr-. I ft I i»IP^ 56 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plato X CALIFORNIA POPULATION 1890 TO 1930 AND ESTIMATED FUTURE POPULATION SHOWING REASONABLE LIMITS OF FUTURE GROWTH v> c o "1 c c o V _(0 D Q. O Q. 50 : FIGURE 1 z. 40 30 20 \ z \ , 1 l\ 1 - ^ ■"^ S 10 , -^*^ "" - - ^ ^^C- ' - 7 - ^^z^\ - - ^^^^■"^ - 5 - ^^ - r : 3 2 1 I ^ : - ^ ^ - rill _i_j — i__i_ 1 1 i.-i._ 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 . i_ ^^ \ \ 1 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 Year 1940 1950 I960 1970 c ro I/) o 1 0.000 p 7,000 5.000 4,000 3.0C0 NET EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION TO CALIFORNIA 1880 TO 1930 SHOWING FUTURE IMMIGRATION NECESSARY TO ATTAIN POPULATIONS SHOWN IN FIGURE I (children under ten years of age not included) .b 2000 c o ■p !E ■OO e e > 0) 0) - rIGuKe. c - - - - - - _^-— i ^^ -^ I : ^ - : ^^ ^B - / < ^\ - / - - / ""^^^^ - - _ — ' ^""^^^ - - / ^^ •—^^ - / ^""^ r / E E / , : ^ / - "~" / - 1,000 700 500 400 300 200 100 1880-90 1890 1900 1900-10 191020 1920-30 1930-40 1940 50 1950-60 1960-70 Decade RATK OK IRRIflATION DKVEIX)PMKNT 57 (MiArriiK IV TRENDS IN CALIFORNIA CROP LAND UTILIZATION. 1909 1929 Irrisjatioii tlt>vcl(»pm«>iit and a shift to int«'iisiv«' rrops \in«l«r irri- pition. the n'tin'iut'ut of \\\v liorsc in fav(»r of th<' truck, tractor and automobdo. ohan>;cs in the amount and kind of feed required to produce hutterfat. the growth of the beef fattening' business in lieu of b«vf raisinir an«l important (h'velopinents within the fruit and vefjetable industries all have contril)Ut«'d to brinu' al)«>ut outstandinj; chancres in the use of California crop lands during; the juist 20 years. Th»se ehanjj»»s in land utilization have made possible an increase durinp the same period of more than HM) per cent in production with only a 15 per cent increase in acrea^'c of harvested crops. At the same time larpe investments of capital have completely chan^eroduction and returns therefrom may l)e calculated. This has ^'ivm rise to many errors- on the part o( those who have a.ssumed increased production |)er acre and inerea.sed output per man workin«r on the farm indicate a proportionate increase in efiicieney of aj:rieultural production. In reality the funda- mental chanjre which has tak"n place has been the more intensive appli- cation of capital to lan«l and the transt'er of many (»f the processes in ajrricultural production to urban centers. This has brouirlit about a much different relation between the vohnne of apricultural production and the land area involved, the investment per acre and the number of peo|>le enpajred in that part (»f the at;ricultural production jjrocess u : ,.h still nipjires their resilience in the country. It has not neces- sarily been in all eases an increased output mea.sured in tenns of the total investment. Mo>t of the ('* • >rs of this report are concerned with tlie measure- ment of these ' _ > with a view to estimntinp the importance an acre of land may have in the California ajrriculture of the future. This knowledge, topet her with estimates of po|)ulation prowth. .shoidd make possible an approximate estimat** of re»piirements ff.r irrigated land. Variation in Acreage. The year to year changes in acreage of annual crops are in most ca.ses violent* These are in response to changes in the economic situation of the crops jrrown. the •• of sucees.s which has followed plantings in previous ye— •■•■d. t.- .. ♦•-•• »<...» " ither conditions the current year. In «• ■ to th- ii acreage, there are cyclical changes which indicate an economic condition rcfpiirinp more than a year to come into equilibrium. Finally, there are i tnt chanpes taking place which require many years for their < ion. Th«*8C .shuts in most ca.ses are in response to jM-rmanent el, in the basic conditions of land utilization, such as improvements in agricultural pro- duction, developnjent of cr- vi- area.H. |»ennanent stibstitutions in the Us*' of the prrMluct.«i pro^iu. ... • ' •• riny other inlliiences. In a pre- diction attempting to look four -^ into the future, the year to year variations of course cannot be foreseen. The sh»»rter cycles are oH DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XI HARVESTED ACREAGE AND TREND IN THE HARVESTED ACREAGE OF WHEAT IN CALIFORNIA 3,500 3,000 c/, 2300 o (TJ 10 -o c in o 2,000 1,500 < 1,000 500 1879 1889 1899 1909 ' 1 I [ > I 1 1 j 1 ^ t I 1 ■ • I I : I I I 1 FIGURE 1 1 ! 1 ! ! : 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I /^\|1A^\'a - 1 V I - - l\ - - 1 I - \ L .A^-/^ - ! ' V ■ 1 ! 1 1 1 : . 1919 1929 Year BEARING ACREAGE AND TREND IN THE BEARING ACREAGE OF PEARS IN CALIFORNIA 1909 lUU 11.. — T^ — r— 1 - ; I FIGURE 2 ; 1 I 1 o - »4- o ' y^ in C 50 ^^.^ in O y^:^^^ ^ _ 01 (U n .— — —^^ - < 1914 1919 Year 192^,. 1929 IJATK OK IKKIOATIiiN nKVKM>l*MKNT .'ijl mi|His>ili|f <>| |ir<-tiicli tlir iii'iul whu'h becomes iin|Mirlaiit in ll: . : .. lime r«»nrji.st. and It is Froin this point nf view that tiu' Hluilii's of laml utili/.ation have l»eeM earrietl out The illu>trationN in liii.N eiiapii-r ainl many ui im ii^iin-s iisetl ar<- the aerea;ri>>> wliieli uoiiM have prevaih'ii had the major liMuh'ncies in hind iitili/ation Ween i'olhiwed without the saw-tooth variation .so eharae- teristic of the anniud erops. The elimination of the»(e sharp variaitiunH was ni*eevsary to a\oii| eont'iisiun and to hrin^' out the major ehanireM. iN'i'ennials are snhjeet to important variations from the trend, but \«'ar to year variations are h'ss pronoiineed. Plate X I shows th^ \arintions in the California harvestetl aereajje of wheat, an annual erop. <)ver a period of !nany year>, in eoiitrasi to the aereaj/e of pears. a perennial erop. The treiul.s in the aena^'t's are .shown for comparison. This illustration is jriven not so mueh to point <»ut the facts coneerninjr the.s«' two crops, but to enable the reader to interpret properly the illus- trations which are to follow an«l in which minor variations in aereap' do not appear. In the con>,tr»u'tion of the plates, the trend values for the individual crops have been added. The changes in the areas between the lines in the illustration.^, therefore, show the tr«*nds for each crop of th«' ^rroup. whih' the treiul for the entire jrroup is shown by the '•'■■•_'ht of the upper eurvf above the base line. This inethoil of presen- • '11 has certain tlisatlvantafres. but the intluente that each crop has had upon the entire proup couhl Iw shown in no other way. Relation of Acreage of Harvested Cropt to Gross Area. Crop surveys made by tin* use of automobile and speetjoiiieicr in the •Sacramento Valley show an excess of about *_*.") per cent in the ^rross acreap" ni<>nt of . ••. One is an estinmte of the actual acreape harvesttfl. the other nn estitnate of jrros.s area, including roa«ls, buildings and small uncultivated fields whi " imt of .-nt size to re«'ord. nui> in«*tudi-s jdl nr'-'— '■; and \Mi._..irds, b..ii.M.r. nonlH'arinp. and abandoned. Tin- ot) iiides onI\ be;iriiiu' orchards and viin-yards \ut\ only includes the important ero|>H. .\i \erthcle,sii the cHtinnttcfi of crop land 7'-tl in the census and by the State Crop |j,.j,,,,.t ;,. - - , valntdile inde^ •'' -ross n-fpiiri-njents, 'ri'.>. ]. •• unpubtish<-d |. uether witli sonu* additional d.ita fi< form the basis of the analysis ill f^|i^ ,1 . 11 iii. I j.i. I. II III a '• • — ehnpter in terms of rrosN ai Over |N>ri(Mls of nnie th- o acreage of har- d crops is ' ••! the ini|Niriant rea.snns for thejte aiipes is the re«iuri hh m nn ^imoiint of fallow land. Furthermore, 60 • DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES there are changes in tlie acreages of non-bearing fruits. Plates XII and XITI slio-w the trends in the non-bearing acreages of fruit in California and in the San Joaciuin Valley. Since 1924 the non-bearing fruit acreage has been dropping rapidly. Trend in the Acreage of Total Crop Land Harvested in California. The total acreage of land devoted to harvested crops in the state of California has not changed greatly during the past 20 years. It has already been stated that tlie increase in acreage of harvested crops was only about 15 per cent during tliis period. The crop acreage reached a peak in the years 1918 and 1919,* but fell slightly until 1924, when a rise set in again. In 1929 the total area in harvested crops was nearly 7,000.000 acres. The acre is a poor measure of land, however, unless some knoAvledge can be gained concerning its character and uses. The reasons why California has been able to bring about such a phenomenal increase in y)roduetion with so small an increase in cropped area can be understood by noting the changes which have taken place in the acreages of the important groups of crops. To facilitate the study of these changes, acreages and trends in the acreages of the total crop land harvested and of the important crop groups are presented in Table 14, while the trends are shoAvn graphically in Plate XIV. Although the total acreage has not varied greatly, many important changes are found in the trends of the acreages of the crops making up that total. Wliile sub-tropical fruits and nuts, temperate zone fruits, vegetables and miscellaneous field crops, consisting of beans, sugar beets and cotton, have increased in acreage considerably over this period, the acreage devoted to cereals and hay and forage crops has decreased. To give a better picture of the changes that have occurred in the acreage utilized by the various groups of crops in California, Table 15 is given. This shows the percentage increase or decrease in the acreage for the periods 1909 to 1929, 1909 to 1919, and 1919 to 1929. In the year 1909 the area devoted to cereals and hay and forage crops represented a])proximately 80 per cent of the total cropped acreage, Avhile in 1929 tiiis percentage had fallen to a little less than 60 per cent of the total cropped area. Most of this decrease in acreage occurred in haj' and forage crops. Table 15 also shows that the combined acreage devoted to sub-tropical fruits and nuts, temperate zone fruits, and vege- tables more than doubled from 1909 to 1929, while the acreage in the miscellaneous field cro])s, beans, sugar beets and cotton, increased approximately 66 per cent over the entire period. All of this increase occurred, however, in the earlier decade. Sub-tropical Fruits and Nuts. The acreage devoted to the production of California sub-tropical fruits and nuts has more than doubled in the past twenty years, occu- l)ying an area of more than 1,100.000 acres in 1929. While the grape aei'eage aeeoniils for moi-e tlian hall" of Ihis expansion, tliere has been a pronounced increase in tlie acreage of the otlicr sub-tropical fruits and nuls. ("ilius fruits liave increased over 400 jier cent; the im})ortant nut ♦ It will be seen thrnuphout lli. following pages of thi.s chapter thnt the period of inflation following the war has been recorded even in the trend of crop acreages. 'I'lic luak ol r.i|!t, lio\vi\l'MKNT fin IM.r.- \t^- TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES Of THC TOTAL CROP LAND HARVESTED CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO MAJOR GROUPS IN CALIFOPS '•• 64 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES < I o < Z o u z D H w > a. o s a: s u < -J *" <; H O H u X H b O u O < u U < u E H w Q Z u o: H D Z < «3 U < u q: u < T3 S O -^»o»ooa»OiO»ftC^ec»o«oooioro — osc^eccoos •a a e to^^^*nf£StOf^f^i^^'^fO':DtO<:OfO''Or££i:^:0 1 2 Ill r^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 OS(M!MC4^tO^Ci — — iCVI *n O— i c^ ^ ^ c^ c>J cs c^ c^ i !;;;;:: ; C^J«»f5!;DW500'*Q0iCO--00i/M0C^»r5»C'^OCCC0 ■^ OS— ''^r>-^'Ot^coo«ccC'^ic*oc^h-r'-o»/3c:^»« o ■"r-^-^eocceoc^c^c^ — ^^^ — ■^ociciocoocj C3 w OkOtO^^kQ<««t|QCO 2 (NOOOOOOOOOC^OiOOOO-^00<-00000 •g »ccDt^ooc»o-^c^ffO'^'^'^«5coooaiecccort«o ^^^w^C^(MC4C4C^C^CMC>4CMC^ClCOC?'V4<^ S J c^c^(^^<^^|^^c^coco'<»•Tr■^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u < ;;;;;:;; o--coccoc^-*'<*'00'^osr*ifteoioootoos^t^os csj-^roooo — CMrcc^-^-^iftr^os^Meoeooaeo^o*© s c^CMCMWr^rcrcrccocccoeoeoco-^^^^waiOiO o 2 3 e 1 c^ 1 1 1 1 •-t 00 05 -^ eo o> OS CO Q 00 r* ooooi«DC>JOO'^^ocO"roeo ■§ 13 '3 v i; 1- "5 •1 p 1 csj I I I ! -«< r>. c^« cs ic to r^ 00 CO ^ Ob «o CO o >o ca a» ) • 1 i*-ici CO tooo ^ t^ «oo w »-t»^ooc4coeo 1* •* 1 1 1 tio«o»C'»OiO«C":or^r^oooaoo^ — « 3 ; ; 1^1 „-_-_-„--- OO • s >« CBO^^C4CO^U) S a SSS o> ^ A OS o o»o>oao3 oi a»oa a> i IS 6c ■c £ ^ ^ £ a .s o J3 1 tie e ca 3L < 1 I >. eg £% S Ho, O - e<^ 3 <^ RATE OF IBRIOATH»N DEVKI.OI'MENT TABLIi 15 PJHUNTAC.F OF TX^TAL MARVl-STF.D CROP AREA IN CALIFORNIA DI-VOTIil) OIFFIRINT l.HOl l»S OF CJ> ."J Total aroo bad ^rr«rt-lf«viMl fruila Trfupankia tone fruiti \r«rUbtn MifnlkaMMi (Md rrofa Hftjr* Mtd (oraf* -• 100 8 4 S 6 4S 88 100 10 8 4 IS S4 S8 100 17 8 7 9 S8 SI IS 143 I. VI JM M —33 8 S4 19 .'.'J 111 — IS 1 n «3 91 —SI —10 Cmah — « -Ml — « :nua acn iadiealci » Arctt—t. '-~-U«n %rr riimpRNI\ AlJtKACIFS OF THE INDIVIOLAl. SUB- TROPICAL FRUITS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT CJROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN THE ACREAGE OF EACH Group aod ffop IVrcraUr' ot total nil> tropical (ruitacnaci Percratac* iacrcaM iaacrooi* 1909 100 s 33 1 8 8 U 3 S 19S9 1909-39 1909-19 1919-29 Sub trvfital fniito tad nuta . . . 100 IS M 100 17 M 143 I'U 4 4ixt Vtf 107 840 34 7m 117 1 4S 100 83 30 Orm^r* 39 Gra|«fniit.. ........... . WokMl* A!«Mrfi • ip«0 ......... MM &S 191 94 .<« .. ........ 46 370 I^mnlaco a** ea«p«t«d oo baa* of Irawlt. crops oviT 6()0 |M'r mit ; oliv»'s about KIT ptT mit and lip; approxi- niati'Iy ''4() per ct-nt from 1I>09 to 1{<'J!>. Diirin^; this sniiu' ]»erio(l. vine- ynnls iiu'roasrd in aeroap«» almost 9!) per cont. I'y far thr irreatost part of tliis iiuTi'ttso oiuiit' diiriiiir tlio soonn«l tlrfad*' of tlio twenty yonr p«'rio(i. I'p until 11)20 thr inereasi' in tlu' acreap' trend of tlic ijroup had amounttMl to only .'U per cent. Th«\s4« trends are Hhown jrraphically in Plate XV and are also indicated in Table IG. Tomparato Zona Fruit*. Temperate zone fruits in California eoveretl an area of a|iproxiiiiately 57().(K)() acres in 1!>*J!'. whieh represontetl about X per cent of the total crop land harvested. With the exception of the apple aerea^c, which inerea.sed only about <)'> per cent, all the fruits in this ^roup iiu»re than doubled in acreage duriuK the two decadcH. Table 17 and I*late XVI Khow the relative increase's in the acreage of the fruits in this (rroup for ilifTerent periout M per cent of the acreage in this ifroup is devot»• samo time that a out IS p«'r cmt of the total v«'jro- tahU' arroam*. or approxinnilrly >l(M)n niT.'*; IM/iti- W'll illiistratps th«> pnnvth of tlio vojrotabK' aortML.'- Mitcallancoua Field Cropt. •Mist'i'l la neons ficlil t-rops in this rhapt t inehule beans, suirar b<'»'ts iiul cotton. Of the.se. beans are t)f nu»jor importance, oeeupyinj; in l'.»*29 jipproxinijitely ;{;{4.(MX) acres. The area devoted to beans has Iluetnate'_'!). In li><>9 there were appntximatcly 27.'), (MM) acns of l)t'ans in the statf. This area • juiekly cxpanvJiMJ until in IIMS it »'xeec«leil tin- Geaoint with beans or sugar beets, except tliat all are annual crops ami compete to a limitftl xtent for the same land. l{eeau.s«> they are annual crops all have wide variations in acreaire and tlie resultinir trends, especially of the total for the group, have not the signilicanee of those of the other crop LToiips. Trend-tittintr. with respi'ct to these crops, ha;i therefore been ; lially ditlieult. From 1909 to 1920 the trend of the cotton area increa-sed from SOOO acri's to 21(),0 average acreages and /oljow the course of the more general chat It will Ik" noticctl that the acreag«*s u.si'd in the above dis- ciis>iun iiiviatf' t" s^nt from th- ' nds. Sugar b«>ets ri .. r maximum ., >ion in 1917. Since that year, when about 190.(MM) acn*s of land was in sugar beets, the acreage has fallen ofT very rapidly until in 1929 there were only 4S.000 acres deviitrd to th»' produetion of thi.s crop. T.iM- 1'' ' • •' .......I ..r.. iiu'rfa.s«'s and decreases in the trends ni ;(.. ,uv. IKS for the prriods 1909 to 1929, 1909 to 1919 and 1919 to 1929. Hay and Foraga Cropa. At the .same time that a steady addition was being made to land in alfalfa over the 20-year period, 190it to 1929, the acreage in grain hay, hay and wild hay was i .; off. T! ''d . , ! 5., it . t-..,.^ •! .. ;,...,-. ,..ifn more than 20 per cent. Notwithstanding thi.s decreased acreage the feed value of the • ci»mbin»'ri wh.h more than 30 per cent greater in 1929 than ni i.>" ' i% r In t^ix^ m4 V i . 70 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate X \' 1 1 500 "T — ~ 1929 TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES OF VEGETABLE CROPS HARVESTED IN CALIFORNIA RATK (»K IHKKJATION OKVKI.OI'MENT ^. \ III 1.200 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r— T 1 I I I 1.000 soo ■■9 Y 600 3 ifl u «00 oi l>Q3 Year TRENDS IN THE COMBINED ACREAGES SUGAR BEETS. BEANS AND COTTON HARVESTED CALIFORNIA 72 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 19 THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE:ACREAGES OF SUGAR BEETS AND COTTON BEANS, Crop Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Beans 18 —42 +2.700 58 48 2.375 —25 Qiiffnr bcpffi ._ ._. ......._. —61 Potton . 13 ' Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages are computed on basis of trends. TABLE 20 THE RELATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ACREAGES OF THE HAY CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE ACREAGE OF EACH Group and crops Percentages of total hay crops acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Total ha V croDS 42 20 64 6 10 34 34 51 7 8 28 53 34 5 8 —22 +107 —60 —37 -40 -13 +49 -32 —3 -29 —10 Alfalfa -- - +39 Orain hav -_-- --- —42 Other tame hay —35 Wild hay —16 ' Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages arc computed on basis of trends. This shift from grain hay to alfalfa is shown iu Table 20 and in Plate XIX. In 1909 approximately 64 per cent of the area in hay and forage crops was devoted to grain hay, while the alfalfa acreage was only about 20 per cent of the total. By 1929 the situation was almost reversed, alfalfa acreage being about 53 per cent of the total, while grain hay was only 34 per cent. Although other tame hay and wild haj' acreage decreased almost 40 per cent from 1909 to 1929, this decrease did not affect the total appreciably, inasmuch as this acreage represented only about 12 per cent of the total hay and forage acreage. Cereals. A little more than 2,000.000 acres, almost one-third of the total area in harvested crops, is u.sed in the production of cereals which are harvested for grain. When fallow land is included the area is much larger than this. There has been about a 6 per cent decrease in the total acreage since 1919. Barley, the most important crop from the standpoint of acreage in this group, occupied approximately 14 per cent of the total area of crop land harvested in 1929. This crop has decreased a little more than 25 per cent in the past two decades, while wheat, the harvested area of which was nearly 700,000 acres in 1929, a little more than two-thirds that of barley, has increased its acreage about 4 per cent. Wheat, however, had undergone a precipitous decline in acreage just prior to the beginning of these two decades and barley had just reached the summit of expansion. RATE OF IRRIOATIOK Di:\KI/lPMENT 73 ]'\ntf .\l\ :.soo :x)oo S 1.300 c « 3 O SI i.CK- 5C \j ' 1909 I9UI TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES or HAY AND FORAGE CROPS HARVESTED s CALIFORNIA I 74 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Kici', oats, corn aiul tlic sorgliiiin irrains altogether have a harvested aereajre less than that of wlieat. A number of these, however, are more important from the standpoint of irrigation and some of them liave nnieh higher gross returns per acre, thus giving them a greater n^lativc imi)()r1an('e than tlieir acreage would indicate. All of this group have had upward trends in their acreages except oats, which has long been an important source of horsepower but which has been forced into a secondary ])osition by the products of the petroleum industry. Tn Table 21 and Plate XX it will be noticed that all of the cereal crops except wheat sutt'ered declining acreage trends during tlie decade just passed. The percentage increase in the rice acreage for the earlier decade and for the 20-year period as a whole are meaningless because of the insignificance of the acreage of rice at the beginning of the i)eriod. Although the combined acreage of rice, corn, oats and the sorghum grains is small in comparison to wheat and barley, it was their increase during the past 20 years that held a probable 25 per cent decline in the cereal acreage to one of about 6 per cent. Geographical Distribution of Crop Production. It has not been possible to include here the results of an analysis of local areas, inasmuch as the smaller the area the more difficult it becomes to obtain reliable data. An effort has been made, however, to give some attention to the relation between the trends of the acreages for the state as a whole to the changes taking place in the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys so that a more intelligent estimate might be made of irrigated land requii-ements. Table 22 gives the acreages of the total crop land hai'vested for the state and for the two interior valleys for 1909. 1919 and 1929. It will be observed that the the relative area of crop land harvested has increased in the two \alleys and decreased in the other ])arts of the .state. In 1909 seventeen counties* of the two valleys contained 43 per cent of the total crop land harvested in the state. By 1929 this jiercentage had increased to 55 per cent. Total crop land harvested, however, does not tell the whole story. Sub- tropical fruit and nut acreage in the San Joaquin Valley increased in relative importance from 40 ])er cent of the state total acreage of this group of croi)s in 1909 to 52 per cent in 1929, while in the Sacramento Valle.y this group decreased in i-elative importance from 10 per cent in 1909 to 9 per cent in 1929. With respect to temperate zone fruits the acreage relative to the state total acreage of temperate zone fruits decreased during the two decades from 26 to 21 per cent in the San Joaquin Valley and increased from 17 to 21 ])er cent in the Sacra- mento Valley. In the other parts of the state temperate zone fruits increased in relative im])()rtan('e A\ith respect to t]i(^ state total from 57 jx'r cent to 58 per cent. The (MMiiilies other than those of the iiiterioi- valleys gained in the pi-oduclion of vegetables from 64 per cent of the state total to 72 per cent, while the counties of the Sacramento Valley increased in relative imi)oi'taiif(' with respect to state vegetable acreage from 9 to 14 per cent, leaving the San Joaquin Valley with oidy 14 per cent of the state vegetable acreage, whereas 20 years ago the San Joaquin Valley • Sarramt-iitK Valley countlfs includod were Hutto. Ci'lusa, Cli'iiii, Siu-ranu'rito. Solano. Sutter, Tehama, Yolo iinii Yuba. San Joaquin Valley counties included were Kern, Kings, Tulare, FYesno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin. RATE OF IKRHJATIi»N DEVFI.orMFNT I.I I" •• \\ -I — I — I — r j: 1.500 uooo k" 1909 i«M Year IV^* tti% TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES cr CEREAL CROPS HARVESTED IN ''A' '^ORNIA 76 DR'ISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 21 THE RELATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ACREAGES OF THE CEREAL CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE ACREAGE OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total cereal crop acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Pprpa^ croDS 100 100 6 6 6 25 50 7 100 6 4 6 33 45 7 -6 11,900 56 173 4 -27 -20 —2 13,200 140 220 —15 —13 —14 —4 Rice —10 Corn 2 2 30 58 8 —35 Sorchum (Train --- --- —15 Wheat - - 23 Barley - — —17 Oats — —7 1 Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages are computed on basis of trends. TABLE 22 ACREAGES OF TOTAL CROP LAND HARVESTED IN THE SAN JOAQUIN AND SACRA- MENTO VALLEYS, AND IN CALIFORNIA AS A WHOLE, 1909, 1919 AND 1929 1909 1919 1929 District Thousands of acres Per cent of total Thousands of acres Per cent of total Thousands of acres Per cent of toUl San JoaouiD 1.692 910 3,369 28 15 57 1,949 1,178 3,239 31 19 50 2,384 1,379 3.076 35 20 Other 45 Totals. California 5,971 100 6,366 100 6,839 100 Computations are on basis of trends. had 27 per cent of the area in this group of crops. The expansion of cotton acreage has given the San Joaquin Valley a much more prominent place in the production of field crops than was the case two decades ago. Most of this gain came in the past ten years. Hay crops have gained in relative importance in the San Joaquin Valley and have lost in the Sacramento Valley. However, the increase in the San Joaquin Valley has been sufficient to reduce the relative importance of the counties other than those in the valley from 65 per cent of the state acreage in 1909 to 58 per cent in 1929. Cereals have become relatively more important in the Sacramento Valley, but have just about held their own in the San Joaquin Valley, leaving other than valley counties with a decline in relative importance of from 42 per cent to 27 per cent. It is only the vegetable crop acreage that the counties outside of the interior valleys seem to have expanded at a much more rapid rate than has been the case in the interior. These relative rates of expansion will be of importance in considering probable future trends. The foregoing figures showing the relative rates at which the different crop groui)s have expanded in different parts of the state emphasize tlie importance ol" a furllier consideration of land utilization in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. RATE OF IRRIflATlON DEVEIX)I'MENT 77 LAND UTILIZATION IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY With the I'Xi'option of a ratluT important take account of its crop land area in the final coAclusion to be drawn. The tren-ilile notwithstandiiii: an actual downward trend in the total area inclmled within farms. Plate XXI illustrates this tendency. In Plate XIII attention was calle«l to the rapiti decline of the area in non- l'-'.r;r;_- '■•lits. In Plate XXI this same aerea^'c is piven in a much >ii. ill - .-• to show ujore nearly its impf)rtance relative to the area in harvested crops. In Plate XXII the crop land harvested in the San Joaquin Valley, .subdivided into the major proups. is shown on a much ' '/ " .. ' Table 2:> shows fh'- aereaires. and also the trends in the a-: .!_' -, lum which Plat<' XXII was constructed. Table 24 shows the percentage increases in the ditTerent crop proups and the relative importance of the different proups from tlie standpoint of acreape. Sub-tropical Fruits and Nuts. Most of the expansion in the crop land harvested has occurred in the fruit acreape. By 1!>29 approximately one-fourth of the cro|)ped acn*- app in this valley was devoteil to the proed over 20<) per c»'nt from 1909 to 1929. most of the expan-'.'i. ..-■ ...i.i.p durinp the last decade. In 1929 alxMit 7)S i>er cent of this area was in prapj-s, which consti- tuto. which Inrltid** momt CallfomU varl«tl««. U claMlflpd by itorticuUurixtn »m A aub-troplcal fnill. 78 DIMMON ol' WATKR RESOURCES rinlr XXI 780 650 520 CD C (D u) O XL CO < 390 260 _i I [ ,- T " I - 1 r T r j I j .■.■.•.■.•.■.v/.^^■.^•.•.^■.v^.'^T7:T/7:?^7^:T^T.•»--_.,^ •S:;:|:;::::i:::§^^^^ unimproved land vXvlvXvvXwiwXvIvXW'X*;'^^^ v:y:y:y:v:y:y:':¥ :^:•:¥^:^:y:•:«^:¥:y:y:¥x^ 1909 1914 1919 Year 1924 1929 TRENDS IN TrIE ACREAGES OF ALL LANDS IN FARMS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO MAJOR USES IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UATK OK IKHUJATHiN HKVKI.OI'MKNT ? 1 2 \ ." •^ — . / < t. X 1 Z- z > z 3i 3 ■3 W II -r' I 1 1 ■- 8 : - - - i • ?;■ > - *i M -^ i* pi rf i^ ^ i -^ 4 4 S 1 - 6 ■» W rJ p 5 1 2 1« 1. ? • - e S 1 _ — ^ — ?siffrfj«fl«n ti - ax. e << < 1 I I : wn •.- WD 7 \ 5-"8 Z < \ 80 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XXII 2,400 2,000 400 ;^>X;>X;C;Xv^t;X;;jZ'y;ywCs;Xs^ . . r. . ..•« ..... 1909 1914 1919 Year 1924 1929 TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES OF THE TOTAL CROP LAND HARVESTED CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO MAJOR GROUPS IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY RATE or IRRUiATlDN DEVKIXJI'M KNT 81 occupy a much mort- than important place. Grapes prcdominati-, liuw ever, in the state t«>tals of sub tropieal fruits, in whii-h San .Idaquin Valley prapc acreafje represents nearly 50 per cent. Althouirh of minor reiativt* importanc-e in eom|)arisoii to ifrape acri'afre, ti^.'s, eitriis fruits, nuts an*i olives have all nia«le import Jint grains, as shown in Table 'J.'), whieh >;ives |)ereentatre increases for eaeh of the pa.st two (Icejiih's an«l f«»r the 'JO-year periml as a whole. «« >- lAIU.I. u P^Kt:t.NTAGE OF TOTAL HARVKSTi:0 C»OP AHI A IN TIIL SAN JOAQUIN VALLKY ntVOTFO TO nUFlRINT (;Rori»S of chops ANH P1H( INTA(.I IN( riase OR OLCKLASt IN TliL AU7;«f«to MM* (mils \r«^«*hhB 100 It s s 49 100 IS 4 s a n 41 100 M S 3 10 2S 41 Ti* 118 M I.S4I 7 -0 IS 84 38 SI aio IS -OS n M 71 3 '« fieid cnHB. -«•» 3M -5 —9 Miaai ifrf IrcMb. TABLE 25 TIU: RELATION OF THE SA.N JOAQUIN VALLEY ACREAGES OF THE INDIVIDUAL SUB- TROPIC\L FRUITS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN THE ACJIE.AGE OF EAC H PereeoUci iaera lac (nut ■crracp la mmtig» GMapaadcrap 19II 1919 ion 1 >^>J< 1W»-19 1900-19 S«b-4f«pieil (rait* Md uu... too 100 too Zi4 M 91 Immaat 4 6 S .144 ISO 71 • *■».' fm S9 8 7 7 J »7 I4S OS <;r»;Wri:t OS OS J lU n » WaiMto t OS 1 4 3J30 3«4 423 Alw>«k... . 1 s s s S • 4«I 388 44 't*»r"^ MO 790 7t;l -. 1 s i s J «•.: 219 71 Fv ss S 1 7 ^ »:« SOS Tdnpsratc Zona Fruit* The tempernt»' zoii' nuitar^ .i the ^nn •)<>a<{iuii \'ali«'y mcrfasrd 11*» per p«'nt from l'*.. reaeh-'' .1 jirun''?,, ai; . .., :. , . ... .;. in- state total, are the !• in aer^ape ; in fact in the San Joaquin Valley th»*se crops account for i*4 |>er cent of the temp«'rate zone fruit acreage, while for the stat»* as a whole the correspomlinj; percentage wjls only 76. 0— SOS74 82 DIVISIONT OF WATER RESOURCES Pint.' XXIII 600 I , 1 r 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 r 100 % *»% -.* f^n tiL-i ^ ^ * * '* < ... ."I .... i 1909 I9lii 1919 Year I92il 1929 TRENDS IN THE BEARING ACREAGES OF the: SUB-TROPICAL FRUITS IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY RATE OK IKKIOATION l>KVKI,<)rMKNT s:i nmr XXIV 25 : i?S 100 « o <0 ■o c r.i' !?;* TRENDS IN THE BEARING ACREAGES or TMf TEMPERATE ZONE FRUITS IN 'Hi SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY >:f 84 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Sweet Potatoes, White Potatoes and Truck Crops. It lias already been slated that the relative i)Osition of the San Joaquin Valley in the i)roduetion of vegetables has suffered at the expense of other areas in the state. The vegetable acreage in the San Joaquin Valley, however, has increased 56 per cent from 1909 to 1929, but that of the state increased over 200 per cent. Thus it is seen that the San Joatpiin Valley did not actually have a retarded growth with respect to the vegetable crops, but that other parts of the state experienced a very exceptional expansion. This, coupled with the falling off of ])otato acreage in the valley, is the cause of the ai^parent setback. Both the sweet potato and truck crop acreages made rapid growth during this period, but the trend in the acreage of potatoes during the last decade was reduced by 22 per cent. From 1922 to 1929 the actual reduction in the ])otato acreage was much more extreme than this. Plate XXV and Table 27 show the.se trends. Sugar Beets, Beans and Cotton. From nothing to 2r)0,000 acres in a little more than ten years is the record of the cotton acreage in the San Joaquin Valley. More than 80 per cent of the state cotton is now ])roduced in these eight counties. TABLE 26 THE RELATION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ACREAGE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TEM- PERATE ZONE FRUITS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN ACREAGES OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total temperate zone fruit acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Temperate zone fruits 100.0 0.5 0.9 10.0 3.0 74.6 11.0 100 3 2.0 9.0 6.0 69.7 13.0 100.0 0.2 3 16.0 3.0 55.8 22.0 118 —6 28 —6 71 Cherries Pears 700 155 214 Apricots 238 145 62 348 15 210 17 58 193 Apples —21 Peaches 38 Prnnpj? and pliimR 184 ' Minus sign indicates a decre: Percentages are computed oi ise. 1 basb of trenc Is. TABLE 27 THE RELATION OF THE ACREAGESTOFiPOTATOES AND SWEET POTATOES TO THAT OF TRUCK CROPS IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN ACREAGE OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total vegetable crop acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Potatoes and truck crope Potatoes 100 S8 9 33 100 53 7 40 100 31 16 54 56 —13 149 155 61 1 25 81 3 —22 Sweet potatoes Truck crops other than potatoes 83 41 I Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages arc computed on basis of trends. RAU; OK IKKI(;ATIt»N PKVKI.OPM KNT 85 IMiii.- XXN 90 75 poratoes 1909 Year RENOS .N TML ACREAGES or SWEET POTATOES. WHITE POTATOES AND TRUCK CROPS HARVESTED SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 86 DIVISIOX OP WATER RESOURCES It is little Avonder that the trends of this group of miscellaneous field crops, shown in Plate XXVI, seem so unbalanced. Even in the state totals it lias been seen that tlie erops of this <>roup have little in common antl in the San .loafpiin ^■alley especially the major shifts in the acreage of one have had little ai)])arent iiiiiuence on the others. All have shown increases, as will be observed in Table 28. Hay Crops. Hay crops represent an important part of the croi)ped acreage of the San Joaquin Valley. With the exception of minor differences, the hay ero]is in the San Joaquin Valley have followed the same tendencies as in the state as a whole. Expansion was more rapid than that in the s-tate, however, from 1909 to 1919, and less rapid during the past decade. In 1929 there were nearh^ 623,000 acres of land devoted to the production of hay and forage crops, about one-third of the state total. Although the trend of the total hay and forage acreage increased 7 ]ier cent from 1909 to 1929, the acreage of all the crops in this group witli the exception of alfalfa decreased. Grain hay acreage, which constituted in 1929 about 23 per cent of the hay acreage, decreased 49 l>er cent during this period, while other tame hay and wild hay decreased their acreage by 35 and 80 per cent, respectively. During this same period, the acreage in alfalfa had been added to greatly, espe- cially from 1909 to 1919, when an 84 per cent increase was made to the acreage. The rate of increase in the alfalfa acreage is rapidly falling off at the present, as will be seen in Plate XXVII, and also in Table 29, which shows that the increase in the trend of the acreage during the past ten years has been only 1 per cent, while the state's alfalfa acreage during this decade has expanded 39 per cent. But the rapid growth during the ])revious decade has resulted in the San Joaquin Valley having nearly lialf of the spate's alfalfa acreage. « Cereal Crops. Although the cereal crops in llie S;m .loacpiin Valley occupy a greater |)ortion of the cropped area tluin ;iny oilier crop group, their acreage has been diminishing during the i)ast 20 years. In 1909. 49 per cent of the cropjx'd area in the San Joafpiin Valley was devoted to the production of cereal cro])s, b)it by 1929 this area has been reduced until it consti- tuted onl.\- 32 per cent of tlic total ci-opped area. As will be seen in Table 30. most of the drcrcasc in tlir eei-eal acreage came during the period 1919 to 1929. Barley. Avhieli is slilj the most imi>ortant cereal, eont i'ibut<'(| most to this decline. Duiing this period its acreage fell 26 percent, .\lfhough the aci-eage in oats h;is changed but little dui'ing the past ten years, during the pei-iod 1!K)!l to 191!> the acreage of this crop was about cut in half. While the acreage of barley and oats has been deci-easin;:-, the wheat acreage has expanded until it occu]ued 40 per cent of the total cereal acreage in the valley in 1929. Plate XXVIII illustrates these trends graphically. ikAli "T IKIilt.A I l".N IM.N Kl.lMMl-NT bl \ \ \ JOO ■^o 200 « O 150 < 100 JO Sugar Bee- .^^ 1909 I'll .-.-.-.-.T. . J year TRLNDS IN THE COMBINtD ACREAGES or SUGAR BEETS, BEANS AND COTTON HARVESTED IN TnC SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 88 DIVISIOX OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XXVII (-60 1 1 1 r biO 4A0 I/) 0) c I/) O < 330 220 ■ 110 Jiiiiii 1909 T 1 1 r 1 1 1 r T I I r .•,V.*-V,»,V,*,V.'.V. V *iS*.*«SS-,N .-rtVS^i'rt »SS S S S S . .S-. S\ ,SS ' Alfalfa •i * ir.-» -. 'i s »*•^' % >y *'*' •'^* "*'''''^' ''''''*'■'''•'*' •''^^'•'^'•'•^'*'*'''''^'"*'*'''''''*'*'''^'''*'''*'^*'*'''''*^''''''''^^ I9U 1919 Year 192/4 1929 TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES OF HAY AND FORAGE CROPS HARVESTED IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY RATE OK IHIUCATION nE\T.IX)rMENT 89 I'iMt.' X\\ III TRtNDb IN TnE ACRLAuLi. or CEREAL CROPS HARVESTED IN THf SAN JOAQUIN VALLLY [)0 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 28 THE RELATION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ACREAGE OF THE MISCELLANEOUS FIELD CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN THE ACREAGES OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total miscellaneous field crop acreage Percentage increase in acreage 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 MLscellaiiPous field crops Siiirar beets 100 12 88 100 5 75 20 100 2 27 71 1,341 180 340 216 35 168 356 107 64 Cotton 1,482 Percentages are computed on basis of trends. TABLE 29 THE RELATION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ACREAGE OF THE HAY AND FORAGE CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE ACREAGES OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total bay and forage crops acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1 1919 1929 : 1 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 100 100 43 70 48 26 100 75 23 1 1 7 86 —49 -35 —80 13 —5 Alfalfa 84 —37 —26 -70 1 —18 Other tame hav 2 7 2 2 —12 Wild hay —34 ' Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages are computed on basis of trends. TABLE 30 THE RELATION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ACREAGE OF THE CEREAL CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE ACREAGES OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total cereal crop acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 100 1.4 3.5 29.6 54.1 11 4 100 6.1 8 3 29.2 50.5 5.3 .6 100 4 1 7.6 39.5 41.2 5.9 1.7 -9 159 98 21 —31 —52 -1 322 135 —2 -8 —54 —9 Corn —38 Sonrhums . —16 Wlieat 23 Barley -- —26 Oats 2 Rice 140 ' .Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages arc computed on basis of trends. LAND UTILIZATION IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY Alllioufili covering a relatively small part of the gross area of the state, tiie Sacr.'iiiu'nto Valley had within its boundaries in 1929, 20 per cent of the lolal crop land harvested. Tiie greatest i)ortion of this croj) land is devoted to the production of cereals, as ■will be seen in Table 31 and Plate XXIX. The acreage in hay and forage crops was of great imporlance in I'JO!), wlu-n i1 occupied 85 per cent of the total RATK ()K IHHKJATION DEVELOI'MENT '»! .•n»p laiui liarviMiMl in thr SarniiiM-nlo Vallry, l)ut by 11)21) lunch of this hiiiil WHS utili/.(Ml in the pnwlnction of othrr rrops and only If* per .•.'Ut of th«' totjil «'n»p laml hjirv«'st»'«l was ih'voto1'2. Th«'.s<» prrcmtafjes and the noroajji's nionf ittiud in this sfction apply to the nine connties • coniprisinjr the major portion of th«' Sairanu'iito VaUey floor. Sub- tropical Fruit*. Althotiirh the nereajre in snh-tropieal frnits in the SaerniiH-nfo Valley nearly doubled durin}; tin* p«'rio th«'re were approximately 41.fX)() aeres of j.'rapes. whi<'h repre.sents only about ti per cent of tin- state's a«'reap'. prodtjcfd in this valley. The prape aereajre increa.s«»d ojdy A'-\ per ••••nf durini; tlu' past decade, aftrr havinjj tleen'ased 1.') prr ci-nt from 1!M)!> to 1!>1I>. as shown in Table '.V.\. This tabh' and IMatc XXX show the inen'a'«es in all of the important crops of this proup. The almond acreage in the Sacramento Valley has been increasing rapidly. From llM)'.) to 1I)"JI>. the an-a in almonds increased ov«»r 'l(M) per ernt. until it occupied in !!>'_'!) nearly ;{().(M)() acres, or 'M) per i'cnt of the state's acreage. In 1I'*JI» a little over a third of the state's olive acreapj* was in the Sacramento Valley. This acroaire has increa.sed 'M2 per cent .since 1IH)I>. Temperate Zone Fruits. Th»' acreage devo!..i ;.. ilic ti'mperati- z»»nt' fruits in thr Sacrann-nto \'alley expanded nearly IMM) per cent during the past 'JO years. Uf these ruits. plums and prunes are of greatest importance, occupying ')() per ••nt of th«' 1I'2I* jtrune acreage in the state. I Mums and i)rtines have incn'ased in acreage mon* jhan o(K) per »'ent in the past *J0 years. Next in importance is the peach aemipc. which made more than a 200 per cent pain during the sjime period. Tin* .Sacranu'nto Valley has about one-third of the total peach acn-ape of the state. It will Im' seen Tom Table :i4 and Plate XXXF that most of the ex|mnsion in the aerenpe of temperate zone fruits, with the exception of the apple ;«ereai:«'. has conn- ilurinp th«' past de<'Hilc. The apple acreape deen'asinl ^ |HT cent dunnp this period, but thi.s is only a snudi part of the total. U is interesting to note also that during the decade 1000 to 1010 the acreage in a|)ricots was reit during the past derade this industry was stimulated apain an, 8uil«>r. Tohama rtcultural arMu, but wma P2 Dn'ISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XXIX I.AOO 1,250 1,000 10 to -a c til O 800 c 600 < 400 "1 1 r 200 1909 1 1 — 1- — r > Ce'"eals I9IA 1919 Year 1924 1929 TRENDS IN THL ACREAGES OF THE TOTAL CROP LAND HARVESTED CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO MAJOR GROUPS IN THC SACRAMENTO VALLEY RATE OF TRRIOATION ^lr^•^XOPM^^•T 93 IMiUp XXX 100 Year TRENDS IN THE BEARING ACREAGES SUB-TROPICAL FRUITS IN ■'Mt SACRAMENTO VALLEY 94 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES .J CQ < o Hi > O H Z u o <: u DC H Q Z u U, H Q Z < w u O < u a: u < i>-r>-c^i-*0'C»oeD^— oDiO»no»fM^-^--t^ooa> ooc^o-^«t04ccocDos<^^OicoOf*Ci'^'M'^*■^^^ •o ^'i ^ T '^ "^ *^ *l ^ ^ °°- ^'i ^- ^ ^l *^. ^ °°- ^- "^ "^ ""i c o?0»c»o--^iO-^»0':crcor>rooc^-^'^'^or>Cociooo o O^ — c^-^tooicooocci--occ^oooc^^ »c ^ -^ "^ cT CO ^ b. trtor^oooi — -^oDcoQOoaicoociO^ — ^ooo H ^^^^^»OiOiC'Xi-,Or-t— h-t-OOOOOOOOQOOOOO «OOO0S00r^t^C0C0»O*0'^CC'M*M»— ^^^ 1 CQ H CCCOCOCO*MC^'M(M(Ml'M(M 1 i CO OOO O O O OOO CD M 1—1 1 , . 1 1 . . .i-oooooooooo >) o ■ oo»o■«rlOcDcc<^»■^'^^lOO C9 o? ; ; ' ' ! ! I 'c^iwcocD— "^^l^QOro»o — K ,cDO^r^•^co■^o— ■'— '■— 'C^ CO ; Ol C<) T^ C^ Cl Tl rM 'M (M d C^ OOOOOOOOOOOOOCDOOOOOOO •a B 000»OOOOtOOOOOiCOiOOir>0»COO Or>-CO(MClOOr^CO«OOOOCDOCOOC:COO-*COtD la a> ■^ r» ^ lO OO CI -JD — CO -M OO COOOO •g OOOOr-I"-r:OtOiCO'Mf>)t^O»OOC^O»0"^iO CTiC00ii0O"-CCM00-*OOOCir--^O'XMCC0C^)(M a> (MtTiOr^rjO'Mcoior-O'^oocooociccofM-^t'm 8 H ^^^^^^j(MCviCs)(MCOeOCO-<»" tot-^c»oocjsO^Mco'*r^co^ost^'^OcOco^oo CO CO CO CO'CO Tf«-*J«'-OOOaOiO — ^ u N H .-<.-. t—t S'3 c^ • 1 1^ -^ -- Oi C^ CD a.'-' 0) S : • CO w -^ r^r* oi a rt* , '^oi'^^eooo CO ' ' to oT icT ro -^ oC H Ur CO i loose oso — -^ ^-iN.c^tMiftOOeOtD'— '0»OOiOi'S*^C>'?^r^«*<0> .^ -a O'MO^-COOIC^OOQO^COC^'^G^IC'J^'— "O*- 'tD»f3 C5 -^ r* CD OOOO OlOiO -^C^I^tDr^CO "5 COCD^'^CO CD oo o> o ^ cs CO -^ »c r^ CO o c^ »o oo c^ i;D -H to ^ -«al o t^ '^•^iOiOO^udOU3U3:DeocD(£>h*t>-ooooca03a» "rt o 1 ^H 1 . Ol O OO lO 1^ o> o • . »0 CO If? 00 c^ o OS . od 1 ■ — CO ic ^ t^ »o Iioco'oo'o'iorC 3 tr ^ 1 , t'v 00 00 ^ o o> CO L. s >-' o>o»- ♦ c^eo-^iocor^ooOiO^ - 00 o &X^^M^^^^^M^^Me^C4C4C^c^c^c^(MC'io« 1 cS Oa 0> 0» 0> Ob 0> 0> 0> Oft 9 a> o> o» O) o> 9> o» <3> O) a> -^co o b. .. ^ o.> ^O CC.2 •2 = c": O o r ^ .. .-o =■ ca -^^ - B °S2£ RATK OF IRRIGATION nKVFI/>l'MKST 95 lAIU.I 12 PiRrrvTAC;!- »^F TOTM llvuviSTtn (BOP aria in Tin SA(HAMI»a"t> VMII^ ni voTio TO nil INCREASI (V> i '< I'S or CROPS ANO PI R< I NTAJJI I lit \( IJI \( .1 ol I \MI < ,IJ(MT* Oop |R Till- PtR< I N ! \< ,' |N< m \sl < s| IN : I \( ,1 • if I \' II i'rrrrntacr at loUl mlMropiea I'riTvnUcp incrruc or decmar fnulMraM* WMraaCB' Group >ad rrof* IW : .;. I93S : -r^29 IW»>i» l»l»-» Sui>-lre{. .. • . t * , • ;i 'n li>j n t»S xlt 47 V« IS 43 • :n III 71 74 At .' '* ' -' ''' ■ 46 '■! • '.-at«a a derrewr Table 'S.'). Plate XXXII also shows this phenomenal jrrowth niul siijr- ts why thf Sarraiin'iitn Valh-y iraincd in the iniportancr of vouctahle pnKluetion rrlativc to state totals, whih- the Sjin .loacjuin N'alh'v, as we have poin!«'r tli«* jrroup. I'otatix's. often ■ id erop. but whieh are ineliiJJ. H . L J. t . \ . ISK 1919 Year 1924 1929 TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES OF POTATOES AND TRUCK CROPS HARVESTED IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY KATL UK IKKkiATIitN UKVKlXJi'MCNT 99 TABLE ih THl RtLATkW OF Tilt SACJIAMFNTO VALLEY At^REAGES OF THE MISCELLANEOUS FiFi nc«ops u> Tin iv^i iii\r« vni> riii imhcintage iNcj< too , 13 ' Ptttmtatm MveoBputod on faMU ol triwAi TVrrvnUcc iiifi— or ilwri— 10 icTtmf< l«l« ltt» 1«0>I« in»-i» I9l»4l too ■ ' ■ ■ 103 73 1.043 v4 V "1 l«XS -f table 17 THE RELATION OF THE SACRAMENTO VAIXEY ACJtEAGE OF THE HAY AND FORAGE CROPS TO TMK Ti>TAl. fOR THAT (.ROIP ANl^ THE PI Rt.I NTAGE iNCRL\»»L OR DtUL IN THL AUtLAOtS OF EACH GroQp ADO crop IVrccntac* of toUl W utd fane* crav* ■cniflt •CMC*' — ,. I8« l»l« int l«»49 iao»-i» i»i»-3a H*r aad lone* crti|a . AHmfc Graia bay Otb« Uac hajr . . irnrikv 100 100 18 40 70 41 : : ion 61 30 i 4 -33 128 -72 -47 -«> — 1^ 84 40 3S -aa -30 34 -U 18 -ai Mnw MgB iadMla ft 4 t tn m m prain hay acren^ro tlpcrea.s«Mi from 70 por ciMit to IJO per cent, as will be M'ou in Table 'M. Othrr tame an«l wild hay. as wrll as >:rain hay, (leerea.vMl in aereajre tluriii}; this periotl. and hay aereape as a whole, even though offs«»t to some extent by the increas«'«l alfalfa acreage, tleereaMMl about 'i'i per cent. Ccrcalt. Sixty-four p'-r t-ent (it thi- (••■real a<' n tht- >tat«' is tuund in these ..;.... rountieN. This aiier cent of the • • ■ • V' \ ", y is (levot.'d to the , .. ; , :,,. ,. . :... ^. ..,>, barley is especially rtaiit. Plate XXXV shows how tin* relative importance of the difTrrent cereal crops has chanjred during; tlu* past two decaden. \" h tin- I duri' ' five-vi'ar |>eriod ;;■... ,.i'2n '• '"" ' .^ incr. .iw. d n\ per cent. The . r the . : jM'no*!. Prior to I'.H'J. no nee wa.H pro4luce L -L. - - * -^ " * * ' 1909 I9IA 1919 Year 1924 1929 TRENDS IN THE COMBINED ACREAGES OF SUGAR BEETS, BEANS AND COTTON HARVESTED IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY J»0 ■t ivc <0 RATK OK IHHHJATION DKVKUH'MENT K'l IMm«» XXXIV Q^^^^j^ . 1909 ■ r - - r ma «rr ■■■T~r- Year TRENDS IN THE ACREAGES or HAY AND FORAGE CROPS HARVESTED S TMf SACRAMENTO VALLEY 102 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES in 1929 there were 82,000 acres. In recent years Sacramento Valley rice acreapfe has represented about 89 per cent of the rice acreage of the state. This ]iereentafre. liowever, has been variable. Tlie sijrnificance of the changes in land utilization as described in tliis cha])ter will be developed through the chapters Avhich are to follow, in which also will be found explanations for many of the trends shown in the foregoing illustrations. Per capita requirements for agri- cultural land in the past, although of great significance, can not be used blindly in our estimates for the future. Changes in requirements for food for human beings and feed for livestock, shifts in the percentage of total United States production of fruits and vegetables represented TABLE 38 THE RELATION OF THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY ACREAGES OF THE CEREAL CROPS TO THE TOTAL FOR THAT GROUP AND THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE ACREAGE OF EACH Group and crop Percentage of total cereal crop acreage Percentage increase or decrease in acreage' • 1909 1919 1929 1909-29 1909-19 1919-29 Cereal crops 100 100 16 1 1 27 50 5 100 13 1 4 29 49 4 71 7,507 76 746 59 31 113 55 8,042 152 106 32 21 152 10 Rice —7 Corn .- 1 1 32 63 3 —30 Sorghum grain 311 Wheat 20 Barley ... 8 Oats —15 ' Minus sign indicates a decrease. Percentages are computed on basis of trends. by California ])roduction, and resulting changes in the use of irrigated crops, must all be subjected to analysis before an intelligent estimate can be made of the rate at which irrigated land can be made available without danger of aggravating further the economic condition of agriculture. The next chapter considers changes in human food requirements and is presented in defense of the estimates of per capita consumption used in succeeding chapters. RATK OK IKHUJATHi.N DKVKUH'MENT 103 Pint.- XXXV "« 1 Year TRENDS »N THE ACREAGES re CEREAL CROPS HARVESTED IN ThC SACRAMENTO VALLEY ]04 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER V TREND OF HUMAN FOOD REQUIREMENTS The rate at wliieh our land and -water resources may be utilized will be affected by certain important chanjics taking: place in food eon- sumption by the human population. From the standpoint of require- ments for irri<2:ated land in California we are particularly interested in per capita requii-ements for fruits and dairy products. However, it is important to realize that these are dependent upon the total intake of food per capita, and if we are to expect a marked increase in the per capita consumption of one product a more than proportionate deduc- tion must be made with regard to others because of a declining total per capita requirement. How much will the average adult man eat per day 50 years from now and how will it differ from what he eats today ? The authorities in the field of nutrition point toward a per capita decrease. The factors enumerated by these authorities tending toward this lower food require- ment are many. The type of occupation and conditions of industry are changing. The exposed occupations, such as agriculture and forestry, are drawing a decreasing proportion of the population, and as the occupations become more and more sheltered the food needs of those employed become corresponding!}- smaller. Not only is the per- centage engaged in the outdoor occu]iations decreasing, but, due to increased mechanization, the actual physical strain of industry is being decreased. Also, through the agitation of those interested in the wel- fare of labor, the average number of hours the men are working is being reduced and with tliis reduction goes a reduction in energy needs. All indications seem to show the occupations of the human race are becom- ing more and more sedentarj'. Furthermore, better heated houses, mechanization of pleasure as well as work, in the wider use of the automobile, and the tendency of fashion to dictate the thin figure all have tended to change the composition of the human diet. Methods of Estimating Food Requirements. There are two general methods used by investigators in estimating food requirements of human beings. One is based upon statistics of production, making allowances for im])()rts and exports, reducing these figures to a per eai)ita bysis and finally converting this result to energy value, usually expressed in calories. The other is to use the results of actual experimental studies conducted under laboratory observation or the selection of groups where statistical analyses are iiKiile of actual food consumed. If both of these methods always led to accurate determinations either would .serve si)lendidly as a guide in determining trends, not only in total food c()nsuini)tion ])ut also in six'cifie classes of food which would lead finally to a basis of determininLT land re(|uirements for the specific agrieiiltural ])rodn(*ls. We ai'e coni'ionted with many difficulties, how- ever, in api)lying the estimates wliieh liave been made along this line. RATE OF IKRJfiATlON I>KVKU)I'MKNT 10.') In the first plac*'. having (l('t» tho various prudui'ts composiiii; th«' (li«'f. ( ^hs.Tvatifuis in nin* hn-ality. wliih* a pMwl nH'asun* of total ri'(|uiri' inoiHs, will not apply to aiiothiT lo«'ality as t«) spcrilio proportions of the flitTrrent f^M»^i^turt^. Not only is this true, hut the difTert'iit has«vs of estimate leatl \n dilTerent results beeause of varyinj; deffrees of ae«Miraey of tln' hasii* ijjifii. (Mir stalisfirs of prodtifl ion. particularly with re^anl to livi' stock and liv«> stm-k products, arc subject to some question as to accuracy. Fijjures on slauu'hter of nutnufacturin^ con- cerns arc probably very reliable. Data on slau^rhter on farms arc also obtai?\able. !>tit thcr»« is a lar|.'c clement of error in other local slauirhter fi;:ur> > where the pa«'kini: houses are not under public inspection. Finally, in the application of such studies to one particular portion of a j»n»at nation, such as the Tnited States, all of these difliculties are mainiified. In addition, the free movement of a{;ricultural products from <»ne porti(»ii of the i-ountry to another, in resjionse to more favor- able a«lvantape for pro»|neiion in one part of the country than in another, ^'ivi»s rise to a diflieult problem of converting? food re<|uire- ments into land utilization in that partieidar area. Hut a discussion of tendeneies in food requirements is important from a standp<»int of ol)>ervation (»f ehaHL'es takiiiir place in the I'nited States, ami which may aitTect our local problem, io or.l.r u> fnr.'>;t;ill criticism of tlje basis of foret'a^t later recommenil. !{;•. ■ pearl, who has eNtimated. on the basis of pre-war consumption sta;.- ''■" avcraire energy re«|uirements for an adult nmn at about 4:{(Hi - - per day. makes the following: statement as to procedtiri*: In r<>|iultition ni« n Ua<*>'. for tho ri>niM>n tliat the amount of fo«w| i-- • - -^I rlinnifpii with the ns** of tho indiridunl. pnrtirulnrly in rnrlr lift- »• it of thi* fnrt the imunl nrartiro in mmptitntiont* of ft '"In ft I- ..f ■- agr^. ih«- of ihr in iB i>r>i|M tho t.wii....i >»,M.h thi» r-"" '^" ■■' ''•" inl n» '•■•• TonncT aje bmim to that <>f th*- nilillt Ae(• fi an M n '.HMREMENTS FooiMuSi MUkprodueLi CntJk Mrat.1 iDeluilin« 6ih. (loultrr anil rtr> \>t'!ji>Je otit, nuU, frait* uxi rrfrubl™ Sucv ... DtconMlBniH- Toteb. I al dits and bui* Ul MMiMtM: Coiomn 1 it eompcaeil of the f^- Cotuma ) mnUin* the permn' Cohimn " ~ V!otito E.. i nnj olMrdi 1937. K krmttn of IVvl't I ra«auin|i(Hin. IVll lvl« Calortn 1 '.iiJ l.ii;; \ '. « I'. P*r rrtil of ' 15 1 1 34 g 1 .') II I.' t I<>> ii Tajrlor't nititn«t««l MCrrcmtlon, M yfmn broev CalorMa su l.)00 aoo flOO I'" IVcrnI of loUl Miorioi of aoumlaS 3.300 lo the toUl a( Um il 37 17 17 n 100 Rat to. M M M 1 [J n 70 m ,11111 rw.ll ll«-tlt 4U 'UI'JUIII ^ U* Mi '' in eahiffln 1. ' ' ' rk Acad- i. Interpretation of the Estimates of Pearl and Taylor. Rocaus«^ nt" ooiisideratinns uit'iil.'i.- -i ahovr the .ippart'iit pcrcciitam* (locliiic ill tln' prnhahlr consumption of tin' ditTi'n'nt products must not be piven undue weipht. The estimates of I'»arl w«'re based upon pro- duction antl foreipn-trade fipures and included an estimate for waste over and al>ove the actual inpestion. Wlicn correctfd for the factor of waste the estimated refpiireiiit'nts of 4.{()0 calories per day for tlie adult male was re«luced to :{42i calories. However. Tiarl recopni/.ed the fact that this corrected estimate was still hiph. for in the ca.se of fats the total edible wa.stapt- had not been subtracted. The estimates of Taylor were based Upon scieutitic knowledire of total human enerpy rerpiire- ments. nali/ir: - •' ' •' iiiiu'ht be .som«' variation in the si'prcpation into dilTerent . 1. In the case of Pearl's estimate the statis- tics, upon the ba.sis of which the consumption estimates were made, determine the distribution of the total calories required amonp the various pros 2'V2:v In th<'se sam«' the fw-r capita ri'»piir»'mi-nt«> for milk anr cent Avere dairy products. The value of reviewing: these various estimates lies principally in notin^i- their variability and showinj; the lu'cessity of avoidino: error in the establishment of future trends of food consumption based upon the estimates of different proups of individuals made by means of different methods and sources of data. What the figures presented do show, however, is that there is an upper limit to the total per capita require- ment and, therefore, an upper limit to recent trends in per capita cionsum.ption of some of the important foodstujfs. With this in mind it micht be Avell to review some of the recent studies in the trend of per capita consumption. Trends in Production and Consumption. Workinp; ^ has charted the apparent United States per capita con- sumption of the four pi-incipal dairy products, namely, cheese, ice cream, condensed milk and butter, in terms of whole milk. There has been a very noticeable increase in consumption per capita since 1917. With rejrard to California, how'cver, it appears that the rapid increase of per capita consumption of dairy products, altlioueh undoubtedly to some extent due to permanent chanjres taking- place in the liuman diet, has been in part due to a period of deficiency in dairy ]iroducts follow- injr unprecedented immigTation to this state during the decade 1900 to 1910. It is significant also that during this same period of deficiency in California there was an apparent sag in the United States per capita consumption. Baker § gives figures compiled by the Dairy and Poul- try Division of the United States Bureau of Agricultural Economics which "indicate a per cai)ita consumption of all dairy products reduced to a milk basis of about 880 ])0uim1s at the beginning of the Twentieth. Century (1897-1901), Avhich decline to less than 860 pounds in the period 1902-1906 and further decline to about 830 iiounds in tlu> ]ieriod 1907-1911, with a very slight further decline in the period 1912-1916. • Aorfbop, Kriodrich, et. al. Die Doutsrho Volk.sfrnilhrunfr iiiul (l«>tl tlu> upward tiviui started iii VJ]'), and was under full swin;: hy 1IM> The per eapita eoiisiiniplioii rnsr to an avera^'e ot ahout >(i(> pounds for the period 1!)17-1!<'J1, and then, ^ainin^' nu)niit thr«'e deeath's. th"re is an indieation that the population trrew mort- rapidly than the tlairy industry durin<: the first dfcadi- of the century an«l that otdy in recent years has the supply tended to overtake th»' irrowth in numbers of people. In oh^ervinjr per capita trend in hutterfat eonstimpf ioji. thi-refore. Wf niu^f not misinterpret cyclical ehanjres in per eapita consumption <»r proiluction in terms of trend. In other words, we cannot hope for the rapid increase in butt«'rfat con- suniption which has takeii place durin^r the past «leeade to continue iii'l-finitely. In fact, pres.-iit per eapita eoiisjimptinn may not he maintained. The pr- s. iif ajtpari-nt consumption of hutterfat in all dairy products in ( uia is approximately X\ pounds per capita. In the liijht of appannt ntvcssary cuts in total human food nquirc- nunt. imn'f rovipltt' uti!i:ntiou of the tofnl inrrmf rontninrd in whole milk, rulttclion of wdstr and trtmln in the cunsumpfion of other 'tements in thr human diet, it seem.s that the presmt consumption per capita is the safest fujurc to use in approximating! require ments for the future in (\ilifornia. Trends in the a^'e composition of the population can not he itrnored in lookiufT forward to per cipita rcfpiin'ments for milk in thi' future. It has been su^rjrested in n previous chapter that, althou^rh we nuiy hav«» a prf»p<>rf inii,if.-!y |;ir'_'.'r inimbfr of children ilurinir th«' latter part of thf current d«H ad.- aixl throuu'hout the one folh>wins«' |U'.,:.. .....T v......||M, have n low calorie valur in pv 'ion to t' . :• n(»w n'prrvnt an important p. nji. of the total diet ami maul authorities agree that they will occupy a place if incr- • T>. In thr ai de «»f the • ■ • ^ ..I 1 I .U' 40 alnivf. \ '- mit««, lid v.-u "12 per cent of the to; iil^ in Pearl's estimates and 17 |>er cent in Toylor's estimatcH for the future. 110 DIVISION (M- WA'I'Ki; Ki;St)UKCES Statistics on United States and California production of fruits, how- ever, tojretlier with trends in the consumption of sugar, which will be indicated in a later para»* other eonunodity drives way. Meats. There was a hi«:h p»iint in I'nittd >iiiirs pri (-.ijuiii im-ai rtinMimp tion in 1J><>7 and others in \\*'2'-\ and r.>24. The pt-r i-apita eonsuniption iu the latter period reaehi'd 141>.7 pounds per year, while in the earlier period this was exeeedetl by 4. (J pounds. The lowest prr capita eon- sumption recorded since I'.UM) was iL'D.l poimds in llMT. There is ord> one such minimum iti the re<'ent ilata made availabh- by the Tnited States Department of Ajjriculture.* If the ditTcrenee in the five-year averages eentered at the maxima of these pericnls of hi^di consumption bo taken as an indication of the trend, consumption dropped :> 7 pounds in seventeen years, or at the rate of lM'^ |)ounds per ilecade. This is l..'>7 per cent of 1.'JS.4, the average I'liited States per capita consump- tion in poun70 to justify any appre- . ..I.'.' iiiiM-i-aiies in p'>r I'iipita eonsumptiou of other foods. Cereals. Cereals also ha\>- ci..iiii'd in in»j)ortain i- m the human diei. Whih- the estimates of Pearl and Taylor indicate appro.ximately the same pro- I>ortions of the diet to consist of cereals, the (lifTerence in the total fowl requirements, as in other jrroups, indicates a smaller total requirement for cereals in the estimates of Tayh)r.t WorUintr i shows a steady tlecline in the trend of wheat consumption in the rnited States from 1901 to l!»'jr>. I^ter studies by him. as yet un|>ublisheer ca|)ita consumption immediately after the close of the war Taylor * * that the wi^rld at lartre is consumintr more wheat, but that th .:^ Im-i-u a per capita decrease in those countries where oth«'r cereals have been rele^rated to a minor position and where the standard of living: is such as to permit a diversilication of the diet. Such div«'r« ' - wheat a snwdler place and such a country is the I'niteil .^ .. ••ms (piite prcibable that this downward treml will continue as' tim«> ^nes on and that per capita consumption will prow continually !• >»- The In I'rr (^aptlA Cttnnumirtlnn of Kiuur in thr ' Tt<>iM>arch liMtUuU. Vol II. No «. puifr •"•' T L. -Nk-r I- . n . .«< ........ ,, Hon II ino Tnltfil t f ■ iM of Wheal In lh« Dl»t. Whrat Hiudira nf ihf KmmI ^ > ■ , • (- ^. .. ^ . ,. .. , ... .,jj W Thr -.r In th» Wrm ■ ' ■ T-, l!i«!i!uti- \ uL ii. .N'- V I .iK<- 7T^ July. \r.'. ll'J DIVISION i)V WATER HKSOURCES Kurllicr declines in wheat and meat consumption seem to be the only present means of makiiiir room for increases in the use of dairy and fruit ])ro(hu'ts. Decline in the C()nsuin])tion of meats probably will not he rai)id heeause of tlieir palatalnlity. Decreased wheat consumption may continue to make possible increases in the consumption of sujrar, fruits, milk and vegretables, but when account is taken of the fact that we have ajiparently just passed the maxima of cycles in consumption of both milk and fruits, that we must allow for some decrease in total food requirements and that trends of the past in the production of both fruits and dairy products indicate recent increases are not entirely due to permanent chanp-es, but are in part cyclical, it seems we are on the side of oi)timism when we use present per capita consumption of dairy products and a 20-year average per capita ]n-oduction of fruits in the consideration of future requirements. KATK (i^ IHIih.AlliiN |>KVKU>l'MKN'r 11 < < IIAf \\.\i \ I PAST, PRESENT. AND FUTURE LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA LIVE STOCK INDUSTRIES Important clianj;es liavo tnkni plat'f in tlu« live st(H'k indiistrii's of ('alifoniia whioh have a si^iiitit-ant hoarinvr upon the cconouiic aspect of irrij^ation (l«'\ ' tit. Purint.' tin* past '_'(» yrars tlir niiml»«'r of nIhh>p anti «lair\ « Iiav«« Iwon iniTrasin^'. whilr tin* nuinlwr of href i-atlh». swino, hor>«N. nmhs ami ;;uats hav*- heen ijn thf (h'flin«'. Plate XXW'I shows the trentls «lurinj; this prrio«l in th«* niniiher of various kimis of live stin-k.* Mueh of the fee«l ri'heep. (Jrain formerly used for other pur|)os«'s is now fed In tjiiiry •-.ittlf. pnnltry. hoirs and b»«'f eattle. and to a certain extent IS ri'plaiin:: ah'alla. Our pasture resoure«'s contribute to the priKluc- lon of bntterfaf. Iw'i'f. veal, lamb and wool. Heeause of thes<' facts and . it Ls n«M'eNsary to estimate lami re(iuirements for the jitir- i; • >ifi. to estimate chancres in thcs** require ■u'rits and ti :•■ nerds on tin' basis of California and °ed Stat4>s |>opul«tion and estimntetl |N>r euftita consumption, and ly to convert th- 's into f pasture and irri- ' ' ' ' "M tiie basis ni probable .11. 'I «'<'ii-'entrates. and yi« . ng these, til !i probable importations of prtMiucts . i he pp u of the land requirements for the entire >.iaiL- mat \m11 tx' suppinij oy the development of irri);ation 8 — 80»:« 114 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 4,000 — r "T I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ; ■ r 1 Plato XXXV "I — 1 - 1 1 I 3.500 3.000 - n - Sh( -ep^/ Z,500 ^_^ tn fD E - c (0 o - -o c TO m 3 o ^ - 1,500 - _^____Beef Cattle 1,000 — ^--^^^''^^^.^=— ' - Swine tie — ».____^ ^^]2llll^ ' Dairy Cat 500 - Mules ar id horses 19 - 1 ^Goats 09 I9IA 1919 1'^ ?•'. 1929 Year TRENDS IN THE NUMBERS OF CALIFORNIA LIVESTOCK U\l\. oy IKKJi.AlIt'N l>l.\ l-l-DlMl-M 11. 'i ti the SiUTtinu'iitu aiui S.iii •InM«|uiii vtillry.H will b<> (Icterminrd iHr^i'ly l\v til*' ((iiantity uiul adnptntion of (li(T«>ri'iit rhisMvs of land Hituatrd within tilt's*' valU'Ns in coniparisDii with the lands in oth«T swtions of fli.- state Pounds of Oigotibl* Nutrients •■ a Mcaturc of Food. In (»rtk'r to sinir'lif\' tJi.- d.-fti-inination of land ivquirt'nient.s fi»r the support of the I il.i* many types of feed ««ed, the OS of land upon which they are prmlueed and of expren- - which \\ : . . ;i in the nund)er of variable actors in the pmhliii finl dilTerent proportions of con- entrates and ro . and varyinp amounts of pasture imt cow are availnhle in di*^" '* I' >s of iVt'd vary, i ' iry to adopt an ei. .- - i.r..'i:iiii in du; ... , ..:. . ilie state, and. what is a wide variation in the ..mount of these ;ireii to prcniuce a j;iven amount of of the li\ UKis. i* Or f' ' ' feed ;irements - nuit of feei: , •. i-oni- sons and - i and land reipiirements must be adopted. For this purpose probably the simplest device is to reduce the different t> pes of feeil to their etpiivalent in di^'esfible nutrients. ^' 1 ... 1 . . , I,, by many inve :> oi the ;....:.... .. ... eoneentrates vai.. ..nwhat in nutritive valtie. but seen 0.7.') and 0.^0 of their weiirht in 'le nutrient.**. About half of the weijrht of alfalfa hay pives us ti.i- ' ' ' ' '' liikew ' feed, silair** and 1 .. . 1 in p« ..:ile nutrients an.:e numbers s in diffi-rent parts of the state, not only for •y. but nls♦• p the future, - of changes that may come in the rations i CHangoa in Agricultural EfRcioncy and Thoir Rolationa to Land Roquiromont* for th« Live Stock Industry. The innnber of dairy cattle r cent from 1910 to !'.♦:{(). PpkIu.-- ' ' ' *' -• • • ... ,, |,j„ imt ernt. In ■ . , ,reatlv d. There a n an output of |H)uitry ■ rinluets ] ' of etnfs -> . ^K- place in the p What rtTe• f - more than ithin otbent. Fortunately our knowletlgc concerning thoMe indu«tri(» ll(i DIVISION OF WATER UESOUIICES which art' niorc iiaportant to irrigation development is more extensive than for many of the other grouj^s. Statistics, however, are inaccurate for the earlier years, maicing the study of changes somewhat difficult. A careful weighing of data from dilTerent sources, however, makes it possible to develop the means of measuring tlie effects of changing efficiency upon requirements for land. Future trends of land requirements for the live stock industry will depend upon a great many variable influences. Live stock products derived from our grazing resources will be produced in greater quan- tities (»idy as the range is impioved, as husbandry is practiced more efficiently, or as California more and more specializes in the feeding and fattening business. The poultry industry will be influenced by national and state growth and by California's apparent advantage in egg production. Butterfat production has the complications of varied types of ]n*oducts, some of which will be subject to competition from other states and some of Avhicli will continue to be produced here. Swine will take such feed as is left after the wants of other animals and human beings have been satisfied. Horses will continue to release feed for all of these. What will be the net result? THE DAIRY INDUSTRY The most important of the live stock industries from the standpoint of irrigation is the dairy industry. The other live stock enterprises, however, consume almost a fourth of the hay produced in the state and use other supplementary feeds. In order to determine future land requirements for the dairy industry in California it is necessary to have a knowledge of the production and consumption of dairy products, imported supplies, tendencies with regard to efficiency in milk produc- tion, changes in feed rations, relative co.sts of imported feed supplies, as compared to products of California lands, and trends in human requirements for dairy products and in population growth. Production and Consumption of California Dairy Products. A comprehensive discussion of ilic production and consumption of California dairy products has been pre]>are(l by Professor E. C. A^oorhies * of the University of California. The present discussion, therefore, will be limited to presentation of the re.siUts of an analy.sis of the trend of the California butterfat production, classified on the basis of its utilization in importable and non-importable ]iroducts, and a determination of per capita requirements of these products, with a view to conversion into feed and land re([uirements. It is recognized that milk products are used for a Avide range of purposes and that there has been a rajiid develojunent in recent years in the utilization of the solid i)(>rtions of the milk, other tlian the butterfat it contains. The demand for butterfat, however, will control the general demand for milk products, liutterfat production, therefore, is a very useful index of the growth of the entire industry. It is very iiiqiortant to consider the giv)\vth in tlic demand I'oi- butler, cheese and condensed and evapor- ated milk separately from market milk, cream and ice cream, inasmuch • V(K. lilies, E. C. Economk- Aspt-ct of the Dairy Indu.stry. C.-\lifornia Agr. E.\p. Sta. Bui. 437: 42-72. 1927. RATK or IKRMATIoV DKVKU^I'MENT 117 as th»' foriuiT an* iinportnblo niul thi'ir importation is on \\\o incroasp, whili* the Inttor nro laru'riy prcMlncts wliioli nnist W constimod rrlntively near the area of proihiotion. TnMo 41 and Fijrure 1 of Plate XXXVII havr h«-en prepared to ineen established, are undonbte<11y less areurate than those of more •ocent years. Tlie 1!>0H estimate, taken from the eensus. has Ix-en altered by the census bureau. This revision has consisted of nddintr to the oriirinal reported production of milk, estimjites of production •mitt»*«inir amnnir them is probably repre<»enta- •;ve of the approximate growth of dairy production. ThrouL'hout the decade 1000 to 1010 and later there was a period low ri per capita production and eojisumption in California. Prior to 1000 'here was a peri«)n V-r 1 P •v- 2 rytrrmr 3 4 P • for »n-l ormUu ••».' 5 e ■ \m mtKvlkaaaiM IIM. 1919 IMi. '■■■» il IW n»kT IwiartrT (V f- I- C" af powiliaf "r. I r«wtr«L C^ i« < 118 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES dinary iiu-fcasc in California iio]nilatinn from IDIO to 1920 was probably more rapid tlian the expansion of the dairy industry, which has only recently canpht np. While the number of dairy cows increased 81 per cent from IHIO to 1920, poinilatioii increased 44'])er cent during- the same decade. This was before any outstanding i)ro<>ress had been made in increasinfr the output per cow. Tn addition to the total pro- duction of butterfat in all California dairy products and its utilization in the importable and non-im]ioi-table products, Firrure 1 of Plate XXXVII shows the consumption in recent years of the major portion of the butterfat contained in various groups of the dairy products. Adding 10 per cent to the indicated total consumption for omissions * it is estimated that the present per capita consumption of butterfat in all products in California is apjn-oximately 8:14 i)0unds. that the present per capita con.sumption of butterfat in the importable dairy products, butter and cheese, is approximately 17.0 pounds, and the present per capita consumption of butterfat in non-impni'table dairy products in California is approximately 13.4 jjounds. Butterfat in other importable dairy products for -which no statistics are available has been arbitrarily assumed at three pounds per capita. The Trend in Feed Requirements for the Production of California Dairy Products. Figure 2 of Plate XXXVII shows the trend in the number of dairy cows two years old and over for the past 30 years. There have been variations from this trend from year to year, due to changes in prices of dairy ])roducts. the drouth in 1924 and the hoof-and-mouth disease. Inasmuch as our objective is to estimate the long-time trend in the develoi)ment of the industry for a fairly long ])eriod in the future, minor variations are unimportant. In fact, they may be very mis- leading. On the basis of the trend in the numbers of dairy cows and the estimates of production ])reviously described, changes in the average annual production of butterfat }>er eow have been estimated. This trend is shown in Figure 1 of Plate XXXVIII. In this same illus- tration are shown the variations in the butterfat production per cow for the herds of Denmark, to illustrate the ])ossibility of future improvement in California. Wf can not conclude, however, that it Avill be economical to increase California dairy ])roduction to the extent that it has been profitable in Denmark. It will be shown that the amount of feed ])er unit of product may not be materially changed by further im]u-ovement in the ]n-odnction per cow. There liave, how- ever, been important changes during the past 20 years in feed and land requirements per pound of butterfat produced in California. Investigations of the cost of producing butterfat have been made in (California during recent years. The first of these was conducted by Profes.sor R. L. Adams, of the California Agi-icultural Experiment Station, and was made in 1922 and 1923. t The second of these has been co?ulucted by the California Agricultural Extension Service, under the direction of F. D. Flnliarty. Those studies furnisli valuable data • Condensed and evaporated milk has not buen included. There are probably other omis.sloiis. tTho Cost of ProducinK Market Milk and Butterfat on 24G California Dairies. Bui. :J72, November, 11)23. RATE OK lUKUiATIoN DEVFIXU'MF.ST 119 for the analysis of i>han(;f.s in fi«o nveriijjes were «'()n)|»uled f<»r cows proilueint; »litTerent quantities of hutterfat per year. Kven within jrroups of siniihir production per cow there wa.s witle variati<»n in 1 ii.- .lUituiiit of fee«l reipiired to pro 1(M) pounds of hutterfat. The averages of thesi' feetl r«'quirenients. however. l)rinj^ out the intportant fact, which must b<> taken into consideration in the i>stinuite of hind requirements, that the U)wcr prcxhiciii}? cows require a much hirirer amount of fee*! for th«' produetion of th»' same amount of hutterfat than the higher proilueinj: cows. This is because it lakes about as mueh fee4hu"tion of 4(H) |>ounds per cow. This tlatteninp out of the curve may be due to changes in herd com|>osition as the proiluction is increasetl. Altlmuph there is much opportunity of refinement of these estimat«»s. they are presented here as approximations which seem ade- quate for the immediate purpose at hand. That the increase in «'flieiency in the ust- oi u-ed duniip recent years has been almost .solely attributable to the increase in pmhiction per cow is indicated in the r.»2S study conducted by the California Kxten- sion Service. Allhouph the ranpe of hutterfat proounds of hutterfat per year, was almost exactly the same as was determined in the earlier stiuly. The residts of the analysis of these two • *■ prod- • ■ "idics with respirf to fi'cd reipiiremcnts per 100 J ^ of bu; cows of diiTi-rent btitlerfat priMluciiip power is shown in Fijrure 2 of IMate XXXVIII It must be remembered tliat •!• -c fewl re« nts are not «»nly for the dairy cow herself, but • • Mt in a.Mii :>'ii to ? •• • and the feed re»piired to , the butter and bu ; therein, fi«ed re' herd. Thes<' animals are either by- pror of dairy catth* ■'■■ meet the in> _ i for dairy proi of this analysis shown in Table 42. and the averape production per cow for the different years shown in Fitrure 1 of Plate XXXVIII. previously refernil to. ' .\.' b«^en us.>d T. '. fei'er 100 pounds of but- ; .it for the df irs durinp the past three decades On the • I -. of these fe«tl re<|uirenjents per 100 pounds of hutterfat. the feed 120 niVISIOX OF WATKR RESOURCES V]-Aic XXWII TRENDS OF BUTTEIRFAT PRODUCTION AND OF THOSE PORTIONS OF THAT PRODUCTION USED IN IMPORTABLE AND NON-IMPORTABLE PRODUCTS 175 150 C i.125 ^ 100 o 75 ^ 50 CD 25 • r-t— T - . r ■ T -r r-r -t- 1 FIGURE 1 1 r ■» I- T r- Y, '/ / f O '^ \r 9\ ^.--- .-'^ 5- ^ _^ :: ^ ^y^ a ■ LEGEND This chart is based on table (41) and consists of the following curves: 1 Consumption of mdrkft milh, cream, ic« crtam, butter and cheese. (Butterfatoxi tent, 2 Total production of butterfat. Estimates from original sources are stiomn ttius: O 3 Consumption of butterfat in cheese and butter. k Production of butterfat in butter, cheese, and condensed and evaporated milk. Estimates derived from original sources are shown thus: A 5 Production of butterfat in cheese and butter. 6 Production of butterfat in market milK, cream, ice cream and miscellaneous products. Based upon the difference between curves Z and 4. Differences between estimates based on original sources ^rt shown thus: D 1699 1905 1910 1915 Year 1920 1925 1930 TRENDS IN THE AND OVER 70O 600 500 400 in -O ^300 m O H- 200 100 FIGURE 2 < v^ ^ .A ^ ■ ^ ^ Y^ ■ ■ . « ( NUMBER OF COWS TWO YEARS OLD KEPT FOR MILK IN CALIFORNIA This chart is based on the following sets of data: I From the United States Census are shown thus: O Year Cows and heifers two "jtAri old and over kept for milk. 1900 1910 1920 1930 307,2*5 382,000 502,'.IS ss7,2es 2 From the Monthly Supplements of 'Crops and Markets " United States Department of Agriculture shown thus: A 1899 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 Year 1930 Cows and heifers two years Year old and over kept for milk. 1920 sis.ooo 1921 S30,000 1922 sso.ooo 192 3 seo.ooo 1924 S9S,000 I92S 579,000 192* S96.000 1927 ta2,ooo >92a SIS.OOO 1929 62i,00D 1330 626,000 KATE <»r IRRH5ATU»N HKVKUH'MENT 1-1 IMiitr XXXVIII TREND Of BUT TERFAT PRODUCTION PERCOWIN CALIFORNIA AND BUTTERFAT PROtXJCTION PER COW IN DENMARK ^ 2&0 3 "8 IT C :2b zoo riGUNt I s — produCl«n pe co« Year (9S i;o »9^s ITjo Bh' future nrrtls. After these needs TAIiLh 4J FIED RIQlIRINn VIS IN ni(.lST!Bl.f: NUTRH-VTS FOH I AI IlDRMA lUMTIRI AT PHOOUCTION. I8'»*-I92'# In ■OHoM of pound! 1 , 1 1 Yfor Buttarfkt l^I(t«f■l t prodtirtioo roluctioa (ur lUU pareov produrUon Rtqdnd to prodoM bottaffU b aU lUinr pradneU l«w "1 M 5 i.ns 1901 1 ■ <.<> S 2.3M I91B.. ■ 1 92 i s.nm \m ■ IJ US S 4.217 trrfit in non-lmporUbie "1 dair)' P< tidurU' l«»9 i.MO S38 BM 1909 : - ' \.,> ? . n 1 (fl? !«»» Ivt 1 l.«l «■ •. I « v^ 1 "^^ 7« :.iM I xtift. rrwn. ira ovmb. **' TW'«r wntiK^ »» noi itrvdv nMi.imi«ri*t>i<> (xil wr uauallr nrald nMT Um SoWTM of data and (imH ef MttvMtM Iirtij .-. CO V -^ TabW 42. It^mii m rohtinn i ir** i-nna r i^.r"- i o* r L%ir .\ \ \ * 1 1 llr^ ia mHhm 4 af* d««M«UMd fay MrfUptjriM Uitnim IW iImm oa lb« imm baa la (otoflM 1 aad aohoM S. have been met, land will Im' available for the procluetion of miscel- laneous field eroi>H and iin|)ortnble dairy pnxluets. Future feetM of (i it. The cstimati's nuule of future *"e.'d rcf|uiremcntH for the dair>- industry, cxpn'jwed in terniH of digestibb* nutrienlH. are jfiven in Table 44. 124 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 44 ESTIMATED FUTURE FEED REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF CALIFORNIA DAIRY PRODUCTS In millions of pounds of digestible nutrients Based on "reasonable lower limit" of population growth Year For total butterfat production For production on non-importable products Roughage and pasture Concen- trates Total Roughage and pasture Concen- trates Total 1930 3,375 4,050 4,725 5,425 6,100 1,000 2,225 3,425 4,650 5,875 4,375 6.275 8,150 10,075 11,975 1,725 2,050 2.375 2,700 3,050 500 1,100 1,700 2.325 2,925 2.225 1940 — 3,150 1950 4.075 1960 5,025 1970 5.975 Based on "reasonable upper limit" of population growth 1930 3,400 4,375 5,400 0,400 7,400 1,050 2,575 4,100 5,625 7,175 4,450 6,950 9,500 12,025 14,575 1,700 2,225 2,675 3,175 3,650 525 1,275 2,000 2,750 3,500 2.225 1940 3.500 1950 4,675 1960 5.925 1970 7.150 I Basis of estimates: The procedure that has been adopted in deriving the above estimates has been. to determine feed requirements fo the production of non-importable dairy products for the two intermediate estimates of population given in Table 13, it being assumed that the minimum land re(|uirements will be for the production ol non-importable products to support a population estimated at the "reasonable lower limit." Thi;; estimated feed requirement has been divided into two por- tions for present consideration including nutrients in concentrates in one and nutrients in roui^hage, to be derived from hay and pasture, in the other. This division has been made on the a-ssumption that in 1970 the market milk supply will be provided by cows using the minimum roughage reimiremont. (This is approximately 15 pounds per cow. This becomes about 20 pounds per cow giving milk when other animals in the herd are provided for). It has also been assumed that in 1975 the average butterfat production per cow will have reached 275 pounds per cow. This assiimption is ba,sed \ipon the production per cow in Denmark, shown in Figure 1 of Plate XXXVIII. Production per cow in Denmark has been derived from data given in: I'irtle, T. R.. History of Dairying, page 277: and Statistisk .■Varbog, page 43, 1929. The same calculation has been made for total production of dairy products on the basis of present per capita production. This b somewhat less than present per capita consumption, but, inasmuch as the trend in the proportion of total consumption provided by California dairies is downward, present per capita proiluction Ls probably higher than will be reached at any future time. THE BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY The determination of tlie land requirements for the beef cattle indus- tiy involves a consideration of beef and veal supplies from various sources. Ap|)roximately 24 per cent by Avoiplit of our beef and veal slaughter eomcs from the California dairy industry, another 15 per cent is ini])orted lor immediate slaujL>'hter. California produced beef, exclusive of feeders and the sui)i)ly cominrr from the dairy industry, comju'i.ses* only 17 ))er cent of the total, Avhile feeders raised in other states and fattened in California comprise 44 ])er cent. California feed conlributes in the jirodiiel ion of beef from these feeders about 5() per cent of Iheir total weir tiie frt'd i-r(|nireineiits I'dP ppoducin^' the supplies from these different .sources to make possible determinations of amounts and kinds of land ref|uiped in California. Feed rerpiirements for produeinp: the meat siijipli<'s i-ont rihiited l)y the daii-.\' industry are inseparable KATi: OF lUUIUATln.N HJ.\ J.l.OI'M l-.M l-» from the ft'otl supplios n't|uin'il f(»r prtMliu-in^r all ilairy protlucts. For our purposr, however, it is iimu'cessary to mak«' this s«*pnratioM. Feed Requirement* for CaltforniA B««f Brec''"') HrrcU. llu' nuiuIxT ol" piumdH of fliir«»stihl»' iMiiKtii^ i';htfr I'oiiiiii^ troiii the ('aliloniia hrcvdin^' hrnls have btrn »stimatetl on the basis of known heni coin posit ions by afre ami weijrht, to whioli known ftfil mpiirrUK'nts have b»'«'n applied for the (letennination of total number of poinuls of tli<;rstibl«' nutrients requinil to proihu'f a pouml of beef. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 4.'> ami in Kipure 1 of IMate XXXIX, hiclueef. but from here on the average feeil requirement inerea.ses ami at the end of the fourth year it has tak»-n an avcrajre of 20.1 pounds of feed nutrients to proiluee eaeh pound of beef. The.se estimate.s. applieil to the total number of eattle in California, after drduetions have b«M'n matle for fwders, dairy eattle, an «if forest, wi. " ' ! nnd jrra.vsland past\ire. and estimates I .yinjr eapaeity h.. , u'elher with the diita in Table 4t». furnished the means of projeetinir thes<« estimati^s back to the earlier periiul. Carrvinir eapacitie?*, however, have not b«'en u'iven as mueh ■ * • ' ' • •• other ' • t^ They ha^ ' _ : , . the d : kinds of p.. Table 47 ns the . ■ , j(|, 'Pable 4.') and Fij»tire 1 of I'late XXXIX. tl: -M iriven i- T .1.1.. 46. The esiimates for the ; rved for with the ]26 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 45 POUNDS OF DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE A POUND, LIVE WEIGHT, OF CALIFORNIA BEEF Firet year. . . Second year. Third year _ . Fourth year . Total nutrients required per head. Average weight at end of year Average nutrients required per pound of beef. Nutrients required per bead Calves 10.024 Yearlings 10.024 3,333 Twos Threes 10.024 3,333 10,024 427 23.48 13,357 711 18.79 10,024 3,333 4,609 5.412 17,966 1,005 17.88 23,378 1,162 20.12 Sources of data and bases of estimates: Computation of the nurulwr of pounds of digestible nutrients to produce a pound of beef (live weight) is based on original field notes on 25 out of 32 California beef cattle herds studied by Professor R. L. Adams in 1922 and 1923, and summarized in: Adams. R. L.. The Results of a Survey to Determine the Cost of Producing Beof in California. California Agr. Kxp. Sta. Cir. 281. page 25, Dec, 1924. Nutrient requirements from Henry, W. A., and F. B. Morrison, Feeds and Yet ding, Eighteenth edition. The Henry-Morrison Company. 1922. Appendix. Table V, Morrison, Feeding Standards, page 74(5. Computation of feed requirements for calves (including maintenance of cows and bulls) has been made, using the results of various investigations supported by data in the field notes referred to above, which show that the nutrient re- quirements per cow. including calves and bulls, approximate that of two yearlings. The nutrient requirements for a yearling are then doubled and multiplied by the number of cows in the aggregate herd in the above study to get the nutri- ent requirements for all calves, cows and bulls. This figure is di\'ided by the number of calves in the herd to determine the pounds of digestible nutrients per calf. To this figure. 3 per cent is added to take care of mortality of calves, cows, and bulls during the year. For yearlings. Morrison's Feeding Standards were used and the average weight in the herds studied and 2.21 per cent was added for mortality. For two- and three-year-olds nutrient requirements were determined in the same manner as for yearlings. 1.28 per cent being added for mortality of two-year-olds and 1.33 per cent for mor- tality of three-year-olds. TABLE 46 ESTIMATED FEED REQUIREMENTS FOR CALIFORNIA BEEF SLAUGHTER, EXCLUSIVE OF SLUGHTER FROM DAIRY HERDS, 1924-1929 Expressed in terms of millions of pounds of digestible nutrients fed within and outside of California Within California Other states 7 Year 1 California beef herds 2 Feeders after importation 3 Total within California 4 5 Net I imports for Feeders immcerio(l. It is estimated that 19.94 pounas of digestible nutrients are required per pound of voal slaught^-r. Columnn 2 and 5 are ba-icd u|)on Table 47. and estimates of the ages of steers at the time of their shipment into the state and at the time of their slaughter. ('olunin 3 equals eciluiim 1 plu.-^ column 2. Column 4 \« Ui.si>(iuireer pound of beef in Plate XXXIX and Table 45. Column 6 equals column 4 |)lus column 5. Columo 7 equals column 3 plus columu 6. KATK OK IRKHIATION DKVKI-OrMKNT 1-" I'Inle XXXIX POUNDS or CHGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE A POUND OF BEEF IN CALIFORNIA 1 10 ti 20 c Z >0 c g 1 [ I 1 "^ ^ ^^ 1 T' 1 ^^_,.^ -'"''^ . . - »•! ': » Kt' ■ r .f ' 1 mi 300 400 500 600 700 flOO 900 (000 1100 1200 Pounds ESTIMATED CALIFORNIA BEEF SLAUGHTER SHOWING APPROXIMATE DISTRIBUTION WITH RESPECT TO SOURCE OF SUPPLY i?00 I - neuRc 2 l«2A l«2» tut Ye*r 927 1926 t9;9 128 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES other live stock enterprises and are presented in Table 61. The portions of California beef slauprhter cominjr from different sources are shown srrapliieally in Figure 2 of Plate XXXIX. It will be seen that the incM-ciisc in tlie feeder-cattle business is the answer to why total feed I't'ijuireinents- for ("alifomia pi'oduced beef has increased so slowh' in ]U'oportion to the population. It is ])i-iiiiarily because California is (Irawinr/ a larger and larger part of its total slaughter from adjoining states, in wliich the producing herds are fed, irhiie the California grass- lands are being reserved more and more for the finishing of these imported beeves for market. By far the *;reater part of the beef- cattle-feeding enterprises are either in or adjacent to the San Joaquin Yallev. TABLE 47 ESTIMATED CALIFORNIA BEEF SLAUGHTER BY WEIGHT AND ITS DISTRIBUTION WITH RESPECT TO SOURCE OF SUPPLY, 1924-1929 Live weight in millions of pounds Year 1 CaUfornia beef herds 2 California dairy herds 3 Net imports for immediate slaughter 4 Imported feeders 5 Total slaughter 1924 - - 202 226 126 126 101 144 214 208 216 216 218 226 188 155 164 112 99 69 314 351 413 447 465 400 918 1925 940 1926 919 1927— -.. 901 1928 1929 - 883 839 Sources of data and bases of estimate: Column 1 is based upon herd composition by age groups, average age of discarded cows and bulls, average age at which steers are sold, per cent in number of aggregate herd slaughtered each year. .All of these were obtained by an anal- ysis of the original field notes compiled by Professor R. L. .Adams in the determination of the cost of producing beef in California. The results of this survey are summarized in the following publication: .Adams, H. L.. The Results of a Survey to Determine the Cost of Producing Beef in California. California .Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir. 281. page 25, Dec., 1024. Numljers of cattle in California beef breeding herds were based upon estimates of numbers of "all cattle" and number- of cows kept for milk, two years old and over, obtained from U. S. Dept. of .Agr. Bur. of .Agr. Economics, Crops and Markets. .Monthly supjilement-s. Data for the years 1924-2() were obtained from V'ol. 3 Supplement 2, Feb., 1920, pages 38-39, and for the years 1926-29, from \'ol. (i, No. 2, Feb., 1929, pages 39-40. Numbers of other dairy cattle were based upon estimates of compositions of dairy herds supplied by Oo. A. Scott, I-ive stock Statistician, I'. S. Dept. of Agr., Bur of .Agr. Economics, Regional Live stock Office, .Sacramento, California. .Average weights of animals slaughtered were based upon numbers and weights of cattle slaughtereef available for slaughter and the estimaU'd slaughter represents either excess draft upon bree-ling herds resulting in their depletion, or the reverse, resulting in their increase. Tliis annual difference between U'eves availabW for slaughter and beeves actu- ally slaughtered wxs proratol iM'tween the sl.iiighliT from California beef herds and feelers to get the estimated slaughter from each source, luwunung that the slaughter from dairy herds is not affected to such a great extent by the .same influences coulrolling the movement of lieeves to market. The following publication has Ix'en of great value in indicating sources of material and the elements which were ncccasary to consider in making these estimates: Voorhica, Iv C, Economic .Aspects of the Beef Cattle Indu.stry. Cali- fornia Agr. Exp. Sift. Bui. 461, Novemlwr, 1928. RATK OK IKKKiATluN l»KVKI.OI'MENT 1J!> 8««f Cattio and Irrigation. Of pnrtii'ular int^nvst from thf staiulpoint of irri);atioii is the 4.- prr iM'iit whioli. (luring llu* past six vi-ars. rfpres«'nt.s the ratio of sup- plfiufiitary frtnls to total fp«*-«'f. This is r\i'!iisiv»« of tht' nMpiirriiuMils fur |>rolit«l l»y thr ihiiry iiulustr\ . A''' "luh miuiII in anu»nnt. this 1 prr ernt. whrn oonihiiUMl with ro«puri - for supphMncntary fcctl usr(l by othor live stock, is an int|>ortant itonr Th** prowth of thr fin'tlcr indus- try is hrir ' lit an incn>asc in this pt-nTntajrc. Of iinportanoo als«> wht'ti ; s arc all liroii;;ht toj;t'tlH'r. arc the cstinuitt's <^'ivcn in Tabic 4"* 1 sn|)plic«l from the ii, \\lii1c b.irlfv ;md mi-ci-l. laneous concentrates mak«' up the balance In eonsiderinir the relation of irri^Mtion to l>ecf |>rodnction. the birtre .irea of grassland Hooded for pasture shoidd be mentionctl. .Tust what I'.irf these lands play in the beef supply lias not been dcti-rmiticd. Th^re are some cases where tlu* irrijrated pasture siipplcmcnts the foot- hill ranjre. providin SIPPI I \tf NTAK> Ft in Rl QUIRrNTTNTS. 1<>22-I<>;'», FOR CALIFORNIA PRoDi(M) iM I r. I xcnsivi; o» sialcmtir from hairy mi ri>s In nillioM of pouikU * " PiTceal -«k1 Marrl! •»I Ymr H.y fWW <• r.i.l.- .•. leal nl iK3 1.^ M 9 l» i 3 I'^n :\ 107 to I'.i S S Si - ii l.^l 11 s « ^ ( M lU n 1 s u\ u I'.r • ; 4 4 ».» la i'i> M 4 S liiS it i: ;i!i 4 » l«3» '■- \: in 4 1 t^ 4*^* 4^4 K«««« f^ aafirfvit** •rffw,! tot r»;.'< . . ■' ' ■ tttttm lit* lrTE.1 M fc..BUgf* ownU for huH l * i w fcr i Abool 90 ptr cnt Umt mttmdtf '^' -"• MMcf Ik* toih ri art Ut*«mna0m I MM 1 t»t UimmmI |ffUlluCl* ) I U fcn t.^ c^Octfrt-^s, *«.-' I ttt-i-i-JT- >— SOI74 ino DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES Future Feed Requirements for Beef Production. California per capita beef slaughter lias decreased inueli mure rapidly than United States per capita beef consumption, as may be seen in Table 49. California per capita slaughter has been much jj:reater than United States ])er capita consumption, but this difference has been declininer capita slaughter based upon Tabic 50 and estimated California population. RATK OF mRIOATlMN DKVF.I^PMKNT 131 TABLE SO ISTIMATKD CM IPORNIA BFFF rATTI P "^l MKillTI K. NUMBEFS AND LIVE ^ •}« r)tn>taa»i* o4 •> . L««« iM«c>>i 1 > lOtlbaM of povitili V«M I9M •f 4ua and bat** o( MtimalM: ii :if7 43 M7 «< «07 f) y|y lot Mi 101 WQ I'll HSU m th* diff***"! '»>- li- ■■In oi >m Um kbc '.cr THE SHEEP INDUSTRY Mthouj:h tluTf is an upward trt'iid in the total amount of sup- • ntary feeil re<|uirctl for the production of lamb, mutton and wool, there has l>een a downward trend since 1022 in tlie percentage in th»* total ; lents supplied by suj)pleinenfary feeds. In lI'L'L' it is »•-. ; ,1 t. 7 per eent of the total feed nuniircd for the .sheep iudu.str\ ir < ■.ilifnriii.i uas in the form of alfalfa nieal and hay. barley and « vhile in 1929 it is e.stimateil that only 5.4 per eent of the > for the sheep industry were provided fr'--' '^ ■■ ■■ ' le on the basis of '•''•'■ Ml- estinwifed num- l>er • ,1 Hid (if th(»^<' shipped into California. Durinjf the |>e! IHJ'J there was rather wide variation in Miunlx'r «' 'in frotn other - l>einjr a ;:iaii ' ' '''M. Dunii;: ine .s^iine jieriml t he I 'i ■ . 1 1 I lu'ti- 1 »i'i I \ !• f\ i» fi' 1 f ) v^ It is tht --.H in the |>ercentaire of mi feecl That thi.s trend has continti- than ' -s tinder whieh ! * ' i>\ the trend in itr XXX\ 1 Undue w niT'-n shown in this short period. The |i a j» in< : by the dcviatioiUi from the a for the eipht- }'ear perio«l ii'-\'-iiii'-i->>^ i;''''"' '^^ ■• "•i^i'« >>i •■•>iiiii.»iii;;; «liat jiart of th6 132 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES total feed requirements for the sheep industry during recent years has been provided by crops grown, in part at least, under irrigation. From 1922 to 1928 the average supi)lompntary feeds used per year, in addition to ])asture, have been estimated at 126 million pounds. As in the case of beef cattle the greater part of this was cottonseed prod- ucts, but more than a third was supplied by alfalfa hay. Barley made up most of the balance. Although only 5.7") ]ier cent of the total feed requirements of the sheep industry, it is an item which should be considered along with the others. Th(» detailed estimates of feed requirements from 1922 to 1929 are given in Table 51. The estimates of the number and weight of sheej) and lambs slaughtered in California and the division of these into that ])art which has been produced in California and that part shipped in are given in Table 52. The items in this table have formed an important element in the calculations of feed requirements for the California-])roduced lamb and mutton given in Table 51, Avhich in turn have been ])rojected back to 1909 on the basis of number of animals and the ratio of lambs to sheep. It is believed that taking account of the trend in this ratio has largely accounted for most of the increased output per pound of feed used in the sheep industry. The trend in estimated feed requirements for the sheep industry over a i)eriod of two decades is given in Table 61, with the estimates for other live stock. TABLE 51 ESTIMATED SUPPLEMENTARY FEED REQUIREMENTS FOR CALIFORNIA-PRODUCED LAMB AND MUTTON, 1922-1929 In millions of pounds Year Alfalfa Meal Alfalfa Hay Barley Cottonseed cake Nutrients in supple- mentary feed Per cent of total nutrient requirements 1922 34 34 34 32 33 33 34 35 17 17 17 16 17 16 17 17 23 23 22 21 22 22 22 23 85 89 98 100 109 109 120 121 113 116 121 121 129 128 139 141 6.7 1923 . 6 5 1924 6 1925 5 7 1926 5 9 1927 5 7 1928 5,8 1929 5.4 Sources of data and bases of estimates: On the liii-si.s of information supplied by managers of commercial feed lots, specialists in animal husbandry, agri- cultural ceoiioniists ami county farm advisors, the following estimates were made: Of the total lamb slaughter, 25 per cent, which is 23 per cent of the total number of sheep and lambs slaughtered, arc fattened In commercial feed lots for 60 days on the following ration: Alfalfa meal 1.39 pounds per day per head Alfalfa hay 0.70 pounds per day per head Barley . 92 pounds per day per head Cottonsmi cake 0.54 pounds per day per head Total 3 . 55 pounds per day per head The remainder of the lamlxs are fed entirely on griv-ss. Ewes in lamb are fed three-quarter pounds of eottonsccil meal l>er head ijer djiy for a |icriod of 00 days. .\li other feeding is on pasture. Lambs average 00 pounds in weight, sheep 150 pounds. Lambs are marketed at average age of five months anil are weaned at about f(> ir months. Hy this time they arc grating regularly Ix'side dams, therefore the average feeding |)eri(xi for lambs on grass is i-stimatwi at two months. On the basis of the alKivc estimates, and nutrient requirements from Henry and .Morrison (Henry, \V. A. and F. B. .Mor- rison. Feeds and Kec'ding. Appendix. Table 5, pages 744-748), feed requirements were estimated in terms of diges- tible nutriontt and also in terms of different kinds of feed. KATK 1>F IKHUiATH'N l)i;VKI,<>l'M HNT VM] TABLE S2 ESTIMATED SLAUGHTER OF CALIPORNIA-PROOUCEO SHEEP AND LAMBS. I9n-I«}9 Naint- «« n/ *K.«M»«\ .n.1 1 vm^M in iK/Mx^rwia •*" •<4ctit Y«r f'sltrnrrtU . tm. 1 rr: I3a.344 ivpiJ " U'6 i.m; ir,774 : -:« 37« 102 I.MO I.4M lOT.OM I .,'■ ZM I.SOI ll'..S13 ] , ; ' lim l.«02 !.■« IJ.! i ' - ^ - 1.7«4 •nte Future Feed Requirements for Sheep. The ratio of Californin per capitn sla»i}jhtcr to Uiiitod States per ■ 'a foiisiiiuptinii of lamb and mutton lias tlet-liiird as in the case of ;.. . : Tjihh' 'y\ .shows tliat California per capita sl;»uj:hter has declined nearly l\0 per cent in eifrht years, while I'nittd States per capita con- sumption has increa.sed somewhat. Althoufrh the eastern market may he to some exti-nt involved in this tn-nd. it is probable existinj? feed resoure-'^ in the loufr run will control tin- expansion of the sheep industry. The carry inj; capacity of our ranjres are subject to improve- ment and there is still considerable waste forajre on farms which may Ik* utilized in inereasinp the fee*! available for the ])roduction of lamb and nnitton. It is assumeti. therefop', that the sheep industry will probably be able to expand its u.se of fee y«ars. This woidd pive a total rents for the sheep indu.stry in This seems conM>rvative in the lijrht of increasini; I'nited States TABLK $3 ANNUAL PE« CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF LAMB AND NfirTTON IN Till: UNITI D STATES. AND A.VNX'AI. PIP CAPITA I A\m A- ITON SI.AUC.HTER IN ( AI.II-OK.SIA. 1 • ici pnvn4i pf CAfvtAk wwvi Xmt - i ' ' Ym ■k^Mw ririMltata itn .. 1933 sol 1 \,:- 1 1 •. ; 1 1 S 4 \ S ]34 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES per capita consumption of lamb and the relatively large part of the product of the California shoe]) industry consuinod in this state. The slow ^n-owth of the beef cattle industry, -whicli probably will continue in the future, may stimulate increased consumption of lamb. Of the 4200 million pounds of nutrients estimated to be required by the sheep industry in 1970, about 241 million pounds Avill be in the form of alfalfa, barley and cottonseed cake. The balance will be derived from ])asture. THE SWINE INDUSTRY We have seen in Plate XXXVT that tlie numbers of California swine have been declining durinji' the past lo or 14 years. Estimates of pork slaughter, on the other hand, have not followed this same trend. This is in part due to increased shi]>ments into California, but increased ]iroduction in ]ivo]iortion to the niunbers of hogs has also been in evi- dence. In the production of pork, as in the case of dairy products, there has been a remarkable change with re.speet to feed requirements per pound of product. The extent of this change is not so easily measured as in the case of the dairy industry. At the same time increased production has been indicated in the statistics, and there has been a very rapid increase in the number of inspected slaughtering establishments. As a result, a much larger percentage of the total slaughter is represented in available statistics of known slaughter. Oji the basis of available California statistics, the increased produc- tion per hog on farms has been out of proportion to any rational estimate of increased production. From the records of such meager data as are available on the feeding of hogs in Calif oi'uia, it appears that tiie important element in tlie loAver feed requirement seems to be the reduced length of time required to bring the hog to the weight required for market. In fact, in the few ca.ses available for analysis, low feed requirements per ]ioiind of poi-k ])roduced, small numbers of hogs in the herd relative to pork ])roduction and a consequent large output per hog in the herd are associated with a smaller production in pounds of pork per sow in the herd. Regardless of the cause of the reduced feed requirements per unit of product and notwithstanding the ]iossibility of errors in the .sta- tistics, which obscure the true trend in the amount of feed used per pound of pork, the estimates made for the eight years from 1022 to 1929 ])robably give a fairly good approximation as to feed require- ments.* These data, given in Table 54, also provide a starting point from which trends in feed requirements have been projected back on the basis of hog population. In addition, they give an indication of feed r(H|uirements per pound of pork that is useful in looking forward to the future demand for feed on the basis of the probable trend in tho human population. Table 55 gives the separation of the California hog slaughter into that produced in California and that .shipped in. It is this table that has made possible the estimates in Table 54. RATI" OF iniMt:\Trii\ iiiv i i i .i\i i vT 135 lAlU.t. S4 ESTIM\Tin FEED REQIIRIMI NTS. OTIIIR TH\N PASIl KL AND i.AKIiAC.l . K)R CALIIORNlA-PRtUHJt I l> I1>HK. \t:2-l'*2t lofpouadi Ymr IWIrr IUUm orotkw MUk n«T OUmt ^^ •IrMfruiU I9tt i^^ 114 llM II 11 40» 1*3 Tjl 109 ■'A 47 p«r e«al at the toul ButnraU miutrod. apprtitUMMy 23 per CMit Mat tupfifiM) by (aiturr and 1 1 prr c«nt bjr (mrbacv. SotirtM tl dita and Imum of MiiimuM I nf urination on ! eootuluac twnpanto eatifctjr OM garfakc*- ' Loi Aacttn*. OaiMr. b^V AM 10 DOT («Dt > laqvirm mawp inwv^ s r»r!n.- i'ouQ(>. ' i:i "f p«pbni rrporl It «m« fstir pooadi of grmiD. o/ oUmt f«^>. r> / - ■, omi Iamb gvtMCc »&■ . mad 0.40 pound* of du Slaiifbtrr for rarli yrur ■ v< ■■ ^■ . ia Ibc nnl rouabn oo U« t»n< ■ttJurtion in ("alifortua ii t«tt limited. It waa found, bowrrer. fron •^- - ■ ' - "• ' ••'-•■ bo«i in Ihu arra arc f«d almot '.he prtdoaiinantly urt»a eoaottn '-' ;»r pouad ■ iwboftli 1 L . ^. Ucn. J .\«r, .MuiJrt)- ' -- ' - 'he rural countMa: 2.74 U of hay, 0.09 pound* .la il the njulTmlral ol that the Mune amount ■>^l JL* tv-tU^mn W i**r TAEU L SS ESTIMATED SLAUGHTER OF CALU-ORNiA-PRODUCkU i»*V LNt. l^li-lHlt So«ua «f dMa and bMM of awtw al — Svmimn of nrine in tttooMad* ' Lit* «n(bt : of Califomia- Y«r TnUl SUpoMli into ( 'aiifarna praduead (Win* CMonda jj^^ 1933 1*3 liuM 1933 l«» . 1977.. IS3S. 109 UIO i.4«a I.IM IJS3 I.MI I.MI 471 711 aa« «M »4« 113 •17 , 1 ni istjn Ti: I3:.:;4 A<^ IJO,M« S7D I0M7I 343 9aL«44 47S I83JM Ku iMcaa* •M i U7ja far lof Maa«^«^ I fro* S*a FrmaeaM^ Ma; 6w IWu r 110-34 Ifalad br obamiv prkr< t'j^A 4Trr^&#« wt#Kt \HJ rtf Future F««d R«quir«m«nta for Pork Production. Although pork ih pro«hic(*fl at a lower <»xp«'nrtant moatM, the fi^xl u»rd. a-nitle from frHrhairc ami byproi.. or IKUIUATION l)|-:VKI.OI'*" V •■ 1'?7 I'lot. >s..r K. C. V«K>rhioj<. «»f tin* ruiversily of I'lilifornia, have mn(le |HkSMl)lc Hpproxiiiuito i»stiinnt«*s of fiftl mniin'im'iits fc»r tin* poultry imlusiry. Poultry fft'il is us«'«l to proiluor o^jfs auil iiu-at for inarkft. to incroaso the fljH'ks «>f the iutluHtry. whifh in rwont years has h«'<'n a rapitlly i.'ro\viuir oixr, ami t«) n-plaor hens lost tlirouy:h niortjility. Tliosc eullod tor th«' ptirpost' ot" lltK'k iuipr(»vt'n>«'nt augment the meat supply. The estiniati'N jrivtii in Table .'»7 ineluile f«'e nunle with this in niiii'l. It" the rate of exi)ansion fleoreasfs. levs feeate.l that for the years hetweeii 1M*J*J and l!*'J".l. from (J to 7 per cent of the ftH'd useil in the pi»ultry industry went into Hoek increase. The se<»re«^ation j;iven in Tahl»> .')7. hased upt»n feedintr practice in the ^•,tN\ is for the purpose f)f eliminatinir that part of the f«M'd already .'■<•'. unted for in other live stock industries. an«l to make a .somewhat li>s«'r approximation to yields of feed nutrients per acre than could Ih» done hy considerinjr the total ^rain re(piirement without scfjrcifa- tion.* F«)r use in estinwitinu land re«piirements. the miser tl; |>rcKhietion i)er hen corresj^indinp to the '•' averaL'e. In the ea-^e of the other live stoek industries, with the .. ption of the dairy industry, tlu' ftnul requirements for the earlier ears of the past two decatles were estimate! on the basis of ninnber f animals For the jioultry industry epp pnxluction constituted the means of estimate. Future Feed Requirements for Poultry Production. The California population consumes abotit L'O dozens of epps per 'fa per yt-ar. Tr ' n nrp e ption in the rnit«*d States indi- .: that P" r.itii.f ! be rN; in the near ftiture. The Cali- ornia poj. 1970 will, therefore, rest s will not reveal, hut it secnw that 10 per cent of the Califcirnia production, or 40 million dozen, should U* a very couMTvative estinmte. ) . • ,■' ■ ' • ' '-') „,, 't,, » • . "fo „i„| .|4() ;. . fe»'d ! , . ri'duced for a ! -" in output per hen and eliminatinp minoel- laneou^ rodui'ts accounted for in other :;. m l'.»70 shoid«l n^uire between I.'IOO itrients to Im* derived from prain. } ...liitTifi tft.iir ««< \ It t \ f r ti th« cJiti- 138 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES < O -s 0- .s 2 "2 M O- 2 1 CO 10 »/5 -H 1/^ ic m -* C^l O) c^ c* ii S r^ coco — 1 OsOOOO OOOi 0>t>- ■^ IC CO CO »-H ^H 1-1 C< 05 I '-D CD 00 1/5 0000 dC4 C4 C>l CD OOCOOO) t^ CO CD OS ■2 r^ooos"© 00 00 00 t"— Oi O) ?> ■^1 CO eONOlCD tDiC lOOO OS 1 t Oi 05 0100 00 000000 00 10 00 CD ^ C?J-^ CD iO lO iC t^ •^ £ r - 00 00 CD |i OS O0CD^*C4 05 C^ — ' »0' ^^rr CD CO 1 UO t^cDCD II 1-H g h-Ooico C5 1 00 00 00 t^ CD CD CD CD |i 00 OS 00 iC — ^COCD ■^coco^o s 000 CD CO 1 \2 1 1 1 1 < 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 » t < K J "St^ Si 2-3 ^1 $1 H S .2I 3 0) ii rt — -*J . Co fc.2 2|§ "OS ° 3-0 ^ --So E S.2 15 ^ > O o g w o to c c C D.'S f^ ci be - is'i « =^ =5 a. 2 2 «- § - ag ott= S ;S^ 2 >« « „ S. ■3 "" O " <^ 8 " ° = S o j: g « - =' i J? RATE OF IKKIOATION DKVKMH'MKNT l.JW TAIILk sa IIASIS OF ISTIMMIM. IH-n HigUIRbMtNTS FOR CALIHmNIA HOULTHY. I422-1429 « t ] 4 Yr«r Am^ hwMliafaaUi- l4> ToUl oulMato prtaliiHMl ia r«quir«d in ■ M II III i^lll ■ pw 1.000 tkoHMadtef Milliom ..^ l.-_ •f^trnt ofpOIUMk 1 '.•: Hi Mio !M.4:v SOT 1/.,: ii: «.ro 'n'»\s Ml |y.« \:: «.!» NO ly.'. ir 5,»W OM |y> 113 S.S40 •00 i<:: m: yno 000 !>.> 143 s.vn 1. -.. 7>7 1/.-/ 147 5.400 I34.MS 731 CoiuM t. DHwmaad by ilmciit hoc l/vod down thrtwctl •rcrac* *U prtidurUoa (or 1930 and 1823 and pxirndtd toiaSOL Cotumn 2. Baxd on aiiairM of ari(in«l d>U eoUaetml by the Kitruioo Ihrwon. riumialr otCMarmM. in pool- try ■MBacrairnl (tmlMB. Cotvaa 3. Kfg prodvetioa, r ~ xaputMJ m foU< 'optioo for ' roapvUd on the bM» of ertiaalr . . popuUtioD ain! 'eniuiaf v. cf CkUorak CO— iiHiDn I033-IM9. aad to Ibit «m mUmI (Mt-of<«tM« tkipanU. THE RETIREMENT OF THE HORSE Substitution of iiintor liors«'|»(»w«r tor aniiuail liors«'po\v«'r is oi)«» of th«' outstanding' ti-fuds of rvcrnt yoars. Th«* ri'tin-iMrnt of the liors4' is pointed to as an iuiportant I'aust* of overproduction. It has boon •'stiniatod that more than i (piarter of the inerea.se in ajrricultural produetion in the I'nited States from ]*X2i) to 1!I2.") was brouirht about by the reh»a.se of croj) land from the pnnluetion of horse fi-od. The nundxT of horses an»l mu!- '" California in ID'JI) wa.s lojis than «)() per cent of the number in 1 llie ratio of eolts to horses has •ontinued downward, indioatinp a further doelino for the imm«' years and woulrl add the equivalent of .T>0.00() acres of ■ .'at I'd land to the harvestetl crop aerejjjje of the state. Hut it wouhl Ml unlikely tliat the }•- •• woidd completely disappear in two ides and that a slower thin has taken place during the past decade is likely to characterize tho trontl of tho next 20 years During the past two decades a sufficient area of land formerly pro- inp foeil for ■ ' '••vn relea-sed to have taken care of lil per f •» . ;. ..1 reipiirements for the dairy itidustry. \ ..»st part, tho same typ<'s of feed are not utilir.od by horses and beef cattle, it ia interojitini; to note that tho feed matle avail- M,. bv tl' ' ' ' ' .\i' supplied the , • • jr. . . J-. ;,...; : ;.. -. 'n Is of tho h«'of ... ;. :y or v : ly hn I the ual amounts nHpiired by the rapidly incroaMinir number of .nheep (tf Ihr inrrfasr thf i" ■' tirr v' ■ nthrr rrnt 140 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 111 Table -iil the feed requirements for horses from 1922 to 1929 are given. Because of the -wide interest in the effect of the reduced num- ber of horses upon the afrrionltural industry as a whole, particular care was exercised in obtaiiiintr figures on the trend in the consumption of horse feed. Account has been taken of chanp:es in the ratio of horses to colts and the resulting change in feed requirements per horse. In using these estimates in constructing Table 61. the larger numbers of colts in the earlier years was again considered. In 1910 TABLE 59 ESTIMATED FEED REQUIREMENTS FOR CALIFORNIA HORSES AND MULES, 1922-1929 In millions of pounds of digestible nutrients Year Hay Grain Pasture Total 1922 - - 1.987 1,921 1,854 1,788 I,71G 1,655 1,577 1,511 91 87 84 81 78 75 72 69 250 242 234 225 216 208 199 190 2,328 1923 . - 2.250 1924 2.172 1925 2,094 1926 2.010 1927 - -- 1,938 1928 1.848 1929 1,770 Sources of data and bases of estimates: Estimates of feed retiiiirements for horses were obtained from a number of sources, based upon records of rations actu- ally fed. Data from these studies were used in conjunction with tables given by Henry and NIorrison (Henry, W. \., and F. B. .\Iorrison, Feeds and Feeding. Appendix. Table "j. 1922) to compute the nutrient content of the feeds in each case. Following are sources with the rations in each reduced to digestible nutrients: Cooper, M. R., Cost of Keeping Farm Horses and Cost of Horse Labor. U. S. Dept. < f Agr. Bui. 560. July 9, 1917. (A. study of records for 310 horses on 27 farms in Illinois, Ohio and New York.) Digestible nutrients required per horse per year, in addition to 97 days pasture per horse per year, 5,804 pounds. Williams, J. 0., and Earl B. Krantz, Care and Management of Farm Work Horses. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Farmers' Bui. 1419. Issued June, 1914. Revised Nov., 1925. Digestible nutrients required per 1.000-pound horse per year at medium work all year, 6,482 pounds. Bell, {'.. A., and J. 0. Williams, Feeding Horses. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Farmers' Bui. 1030. Dec, 1916. Digestible nutri- ents per 1,000-pouud hor.se per year at light work entire year, 5,475 pounds. Cooper, .\I. R., and J. 0. Williams, Cost of Using Horses on Corn Belt Farms. U. S. Dept. of .-Vgr. Farmers' Bui. 1298. 1922. In this .study rations are given for maintenance only, light work, medium work, and heavy work. .Applied to Cali- fornia conditions — 170 days at medium work and 195 days idle — a requirement of 6,025 pounds of digestible nutrients per horse per year is indicated. Adams, R. L., Cost of Work Horses on California Farms. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 401. 1926. Digestible nutrients required per horse per year, 6,320 pounds. The data in this study were taken from the records of 187 Cali- fornia farms on which cost data were collected for 812 work horses. The average time at work per horse jxr year is 1,527 hours or 170 nine-hour days. On these farms an average of five months of pasture replaced 1.7 tons of hay. The complete average ration per horse per year is as follows: Hay, 5.4 tons, containing 5,400 pounds digestible nutrients; grain, 308 pounds, containing 240 pounds; pasture, two months, containing 680 pounds (five months' pasture=1.7 tons of hay). On the basis of the above studies, the following ration jx'r horse per year was used in determining feed requirements for California horses and mules: Hay, 10,244 pounds, containing 5,122 pounds digestible nutrients; grain, 291 pounds, containing 233 pounds; pasture, two months, containing 645 pounds. Total, 6,000 pounds digestible nutrients. This ration was applied to the estimated numljcr of horses and mules in the state to determine feed retjuirements for horses and mules in California from 1922 to 1929 inclusive. The trend in the ratio of colts to horses has made a differ- ence in feed requirements. A correction has been applied to these estimates, therefore, to correct for changes in this ratio. colts were 13.5 per cent of the total number of horses and mules. By 1920 this had dro])ped to 10.5 per cent, and in 1925 to 5.7 per cent. The average number of pounds of nutrients in feed per horse (includ- ing mules and colts) has varied from 5421 in 1910 to 5566 in 1929. These estimates of feed ref|uirements api)lied to the number of horses given ill Table (iO were used, together witli estimates for other live stock, in constructing Table 61. SUMMARY OF FEED REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LIVE STOCK The detailed .studies of Jeed requirements for each of the live stock industries from 1922 1o 1!)29, inclusive, were used in extending the estimates back to 1!)09. It has already been stated that this was done on the basis of the iiuinbcr of iiiiim.ils in .ill eases except for the dairy RATK OK lURtiiATlOS' DUVKI.OI'MKNT 1 M ami poultry iiulustrios Kstimatfs for th«'s.> \v»t»» ««xt<*inli'«| Ixirk on tht' basis of slatistii's on tlu* volunii> of the protlurt. A suiiwiiary for all important ^'roups of live stock in tfivi«n in Tahlr Gl. This table is inip<»rtant n(»t only from tlif stainlpoint of tin- facts ri'Vcab'*! as to fomparativt' trends in f«'i>i| ri>«|uir<>nu'nts, but it also siTvr.s as a nn-ans of t'stimatinir tin- trnnls in th«« ffiMl sumtlv lirrivi'd from «lilT.'rfnt kimls of fftMl Attention Iia> b<'«-n t-alled lo the si^nitieaiiee of the trend in amounts of feed use<| by horses. Plate XL. which is based upon Table 01. shows the resultant of the trenils in feed use percent. I)urin>» the same period California popidation increased 1:{S per cent. The sliirht increase in reqjiirements for beef cattle, because of the "jrowth in the practice of fatteninclinc in home produced pork, ■^fand out as important elements, which, with what has alreaily be<'n >.!id about h«>rses. explains the low perceiitat:e of increase for the total. /'».0<»-1<»30 NumtMn ia IboiMiadi Ye«- nor» .\lulr. TrtUl Vvt crot colU nto \^< , ! i ') aoo 73 i.'. 1 4M n sn S03 74 i7: 4*3 70 ihS AM "i( .VI » iW .VI 4 i\S «'.s 4' »'/. 10 S 37'. 4.1'. sao 4.'l su j<«: 1 lU 3V4 3i« 37i« 5 7 HB ■ 1 3.V. lao 34 > • m >»* XVi n: SI 3I< -1 148 41 .•"^l I V.%. CWmw. I»ll-I9l9k fro* Um Y«iHnak< .S. Dtf4.a( A29 have nuidc ible an approxii: ..in of • rdinjr to kinds. This Mon is t'iven :n ' ' l|y in Kitrure 1 i ... . XLI. It will I . I ..\ i.n .f.ly the san»p as in Table fil A nun.' ild be made with f to tl n. Crop land supi)lies alMJUt half tho fee.1 r. 1 lirrd by « • '• Tl • of feetl ennMif.ur. .! \,v crop Inr . ;;,,ni a 1.: . . ., ....n half of 142 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate Xr, 18,000 1 — I 1 [ — I — r 16,000 1^,000 1 — I — I — I — i — I — r — I — r to ■o c D O Q. (/5 C o £ c c 0) c -a (U 12000 10.000 v:;:;:;:;:-:-:-:":-:-:-; Sheep ancJ Lambs >>>>>>:;:;:•: 8.000 6,000 AOOO ;;r;X;Xv-;:vX;>X';v%;X;;w>;;>X;J<;X;XvX%Xw 2,000 ■;:i;:i:iiii:ixiw^^ .*.v.*.%yi-iv.*-y.*. ;i:X;;;)y.X;>^s;l 1,000 ' * '^ ■■■■*•■ 1 'I > • 1 ■,> n - .,.,._ *.*.•. •.■.•.^.•. , - . . . •/.I •.'.'AV^'/i'i']'.'.'.'.' <■'••*'■"•'.'.*.•<•••.•. •»M.vX'''l'.'-*.','f.'.\'.' ■-• -W. /.'.'.•J.'.'.'.'.^.W •■•j'. •-*■'•• . 1909 I9!4 1919 Year iga-i* I92S TRENDS IN FEED NUTRIENT REQUIREMENTS FOR CALIFORNIA PRODUCED LIVE STOCK rati: ok IKRIviATION DHVKLOl'MKNT 143 TAHLF bl TRbNDS IN FttO RtgUIRKMINTS FOR CALIFORNIA LIVK STOCK. 1«KN-I9i0 U aMMoM ol pmiwli at dttaUUt autfiMiU \mt Dairr ti * Horn* ^'■■'. .twtM Poultry Toul \V» ttl !»!« :.■•»" O Utn . '.\ , m7 IKJ '. , 1 1 1 '*! l«3 , »i,i 1 . 45 l«N .. ■ 'i7i' ■ "y im.. \ '\'i\ »« ItM.. 1.S.10 i.'js: J. . •'. itr... 1 . >• J 1 i.oio "» t >• IWt..- 4.i»>0 * .-> I.MO i*^ • . t . > ' iw... «.JOlt 4.'.Ji i.no 3.U6 JVI It t'.:. TVb tobk kaa bna eoMilnietail (roa vitut (.>•■: i. r>: :;,.! :..i:i>t< tad undtt iaa of t i Mt U rf ml »aJ «■-» r. '.h.i lablv ar* Utad ^ Liim ubcuoni *>v (r.>i L.- 1.: . 29. roncentrat<'s are to some extent import«Hl ajul to some extent by-pnxlucts of crops produced ••n irri to 1929. the feed vjdue of hay increased 'M) per cent. This is lx'cans«' of the inon -• I'iirements for irrijrated land is -> in Fifrure 2 of Plate XLI and . ,: • <>4. It is estimated that in 1929 the irritrated areas in the San .loa';-' ' ^ • ramento valleys .;. . J9, pt-ret-ntap's and acreajjes of tlie ps irri^rated in 1909 and 191I» ami estimates of the total f4H*d requireinent.s sejrretratei>l "i. II' .;!....•;•'• ,,.••■••'" in 1929. In <>th>T \i"r«ls. we . thirds of our present alfalfa acr» buy all our butter ai jirn-hiction • — •••i > .nil int of cow : industry of 1970 '••-»s than it "■-••' . to. with To do this we would have to the h ■ t '^ - ,i.e It of 144 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XLI TRENDS IN THE TOTAL FEED NUTRIENTS REQUIRED BY* CALIFORNIA LIVESTOCK INDUSTRIES CLASSIFIED BY SOURCES 15,000 C O o. o 10.000 E c c C 5.000 if) i_ o (V m 0) < 500 ^Grail);: !Ma^ o^V^e^, lV\af^„ .V.VrtNV'CO'^ 1 1 1 r [ipiiliiili ' '' ^ <•'•• > — <■'■<■ — < — > — ■<•■■■■ X — >..•.. J. . .viYi'-iV.-xvivXwXiXwXv:-:-: j^^^^ 1909 1914 1924 1929 RATE OF IRRir.ATlOV ni':\'KI/>l'MKNT li.i TAiU I l>2 FRFNO IN M^rRII >fr RI-QDIRI MISTS F(1R CALIFORNIA LIVH STlX:K. I«I0<»-I«»N, SHOW- IN<; APPROXIMATi; PROPtWTIONS HI RIVIO |-ROM VARIOUS TYPtS OF FEF:D UnUioM ol iwwfc ( Kl.'-r AU . 'utura Yt«T \lf»lf> ti>y Cimtk (ut) tari.«» WtU iMir Gnia eoBwa- miM»- Toul Kiv lf»l«> raugiMC* 1909... ! ' ''* •tw ..J, "•■B 1 l.«SO A.OSO II.4M I9M 9 ' ■ . . t ■ s I2.U0 1919 . 1 4) 12.M0 1 ''yT2 it .'."■' 1 . •,;■. j .s 13.300 \ ' .'J Mi ?:.'. .'. 'l ■» .< 1 •J\ I3.2AO 1 • . • {. ; ■■» JlIU .1*> 1 laai r.o 13.440 I '."• • ■ \ :») 340 Jill •.:i 1 I3.M0 1 '.'■ «0 rw .f< 1 iiiai s I3.:7S I ." . r 1 ! < ' ■J) 3S0 .^*> 1 fi'ji 75 14.100 1 ■/ -' ^ i . ■" ■s 3S0 .lO 1 ;."- <;i I4.23S ' ■-'' e.4W I4.4M ■ ladwliiig gnxn. J tW tM of ditt and b««l* ol Mbiiwi*: Thit mtnftUoa haa bcra made oo thr unumi'tiuii u:n .i.' pwd to the Mai •OMonptiaa in tbr iUtv. Hay pradMtioa i - powib* to e ati of tkaw (MaraiaatioM 1 coaeiatntat. The mta U f It M ot » ti" !H th*t r M ((cd raporvoMata for the penod IV. ll.r iKk'l.* "I 111'' tmnjimt I 01 ■ baMd opoB tbk tabtr. tW tnod in (Md mpciIk' ; " 4 b}r paiUir* mad b> iadirvrt proMMof til. 'f-fT\>in n pound* ragutreoMaU. '■OH rouclMte, M(wid<4r (lorrUioa i-uoicdarti- itcd by appraaiaat* T.AULL 6J DlGFSTIBLt NLTRII-NTS FROM C;RAIN AND OTHLR CONCtNTRATLS Fl-D ANNUALLY TO ( ALIFORNIA LIVE STOCK. 1922-1929 , lotnuUioM ollfoaatk 1933 1 , 4 ! ' ') I9» j 1927 I93S i9n Durycmttir. u: IS" m XM Zll 2M SM lU BmttmUk... ~ ■> 10 n 11 14 14 u BaHmmmimoim •>! tr M Kl 79 ' 7S 7 J « Sy.,^ \s 1' 11 i: I« IK It II ■ , rsii :ii :ii ?ni :-vi Vli 119 \ iV* «'« «'<; «•« Vi^i «4 US Total cnia . /*-. I I.2M OTII£R CONCENTRATES IMryMMk MmuW 9«ia*"' Poakr; 1*^ t 9S ' » 1 MO 131 97 9* m Total ellMr ««»• cmlrUn «I ( 1 1 1 v ♦*» *rf i ^"l i.W.* r 1.IM J.4U Mil um MM ua tw "■ 1»— 40S74 146 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 64 ESTIMATED TREND IN IRRIGATED ACREAGE UTILIZED IN PRODUCING FEED FOR CALIFORNIA LIVE STOCK, 1909-1929 In thousands of acres Year Alfalfa hay Other hay Grain Total 1909 367 462 557 775 292 292 293 196 43 148 252 316 702 1914 902 1919 1,102 1929 1,287 Sources of data and basis of estimate: This table has been constructed on the basis of the trends in the utilization of land for different crops described in Chapter IV, a survey by the State Engineer of irrigated areas in the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys in 1929, per- centages and acreages of the different crops irrigated in 1909 and 1919 (14th Census of the U. S., State Compendium CaUf., Table 18, pp. 106-7), and estimates of the total feed requirements segregated by kinds of feed given in Table 62 which the roughage for the other animals in the herd would have to be fed) and if irrigated land was not available for the production of concentrates then grain, cottonseed or other concentrates would have to be sliipped in from other countries or states, or grain from our dry- farmed areas used. The entire feed now consumed by horses would have to be utilized for other live stock, and the feed provided by pasture and miscellaneous forage increased more than 60 per cent. This increase is anticipated by those familiar with range conditions. Part of this increase would come from the eradication of poisonous weeds, construction of stock watering facilities and protection of the range from overstocking. Much of the expected increase would come from more complete utilization of waste feeds and pastures within farms. Whether needed supplies of butter and cheese are provided by ship- ments from sources outside the state or by the development of addi- tional acreage in California, costs will be higher unless there is further marked increase in the efficiency of producing dairy ]n-oducts. The reduction in the amount of feed required per pound of butterfat pro- duced has not been accompanied, in California at least, by material reductions in the cost per pound of butterfat. If costs were to continue the same, present California producers Avould not have the prices of their products reduced by an increase in the amount of butterfat marketed if present per capita consumption of butterfat in California wei-e not exceeded, and if conditions of demand for the products of the dairj' industry remain the same as the average of recent years. There is no assurance that costs of production and the per capita demand for dairy products will remain the same as they have been in the rccont ]iast. There is, however, no definite means of estimating wliat the' changes will be. Of tlie two alternatives presented, that of producing only the non-importable i)roducts, or that of jiroducing the same per capita amount of butterfat as at present, the latter seems the most probablo. If we should eontinue our present per capita production, import the same proijorlion of butter and cheese as in 1929, feed the same amount of roughage per cow as in 1929, keep one-fourth of the horses now in tlie slate (a purely arbitrary figure), but increase the i)roduction per cow to 275 pounds, wc should need, in addition to the feed now produced, the amount to be relea.sed by horses and that which would be RATK OF IRRIOATIOV DEA'Et.OPMENT 117 addet! by iiUTonsed pnstun* nroi'd for prain production to that extent in li>70. The irripated e»'r«'al acreape in 1919, exclusive of rice, was 4i)G.975 acres, or about IS por cent of the acreape of the same crops for the state as a whole. In vi»'W of tin- fai-t that nnn-iriipaiftl prain and otln-r rnnci'iitrativs are so easily substituted, it is doubted if extrt-mc accuracy in this par- ticular item is important. The prains usvd for feedinp live stock, weiphted accordinp to their importance for that purpcso, yield about '^77 pomids of dipt'stiblr nutrients yvr acre. This is for irripated and non-irripated land. Yields of prain on the irripated lands avcrapc about 20 per cent prcater than on non-irripated land when weiphted accord- inp to their importance for live stock feed. Irripated prain can be txp. . fed to prodiiee about 1000 pounds of dipi'stible nutrients, while alfalfa yields 4:510. It is estimated that under the condition stated, we shoidd be able to add .'{G2.r)00 acres of irripated alfalfa or its equivalent to our apricul- tural land diirinp each of the next four decades without upsettinp the • ,r'\<'<-< of live stock products. This fipurc should not be considered .> : il. however, until we have eonsiibred the requirements for fruits and vepctables. The requirenjent for live stock can be cut down if ' nry by redueinir the amotint of rouphape per cow by 30 per cent, y importinp a prcater percentage of butter and cheese. 148 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES CPIAPTER VII LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FRUITS, VEGETABLES AND MISCELLANEOUS FIELD CROPS The growth of the fruit industry in Californica is dependent to a lar^re extent upon the growtli of United States population, ui)on the per capita con.suni])tion of fruit by that popuhition, and upon the extent to wliich foreign markets for California fruit can be expanded. A consideration of the long time outlook for the California fruit industry as a whole involves a somewhat different procedure than would be followed for any particular kind of fruit. The demand for one kind of fruit is influenced by changing- tastes for others. Over expansion in one fruit industry may curtail the acreage planted to another. One fruit crop may be in a bad state economically, Avhile another one thrives. Each of the different fruits has certain inherent economic characteristics, and each has problems to be worked out by those engaged in its production. While these problems are related to the general problem of land requirements for the fruit induJrtry as a whole, it is not necessary to go into the details of analysis of the economic situation of each individual fruit industry for the determination of land requirements for all fruits. Some consideration should be given, however, to the extent to which individual fruits may affect or be affected by the expansion of the total acreage of fruits. It was i)ointed out in Chapter V that, although there has been con- siderable evidence of increased per capita consumption of fruit in recent years, the trend in per capita consumption has probably not been rising so rapidly as is indicated by the tendency in recent years. Furthermore, the trend in per capita ]iroduction has in it the element of foreign trade and may remain horizontal, even though there may be actually an upward trend in per capita consumption. The method used in estimating future land requirements for the fruit industry, as Anally decided upon, after careful consideration of available data, has involved the assumption of a future constant per capita production of fruit in the United States. This assumption is justified by statistics of fruit production. Future United States I)roduction has been estimated by multiplying estimates of future United States poi)u]ation as i)redicted by the Serij^ps Foundation by the United States normal per capita productioji. This population prediction is described in Chapter II. The trend in California ])roduction of fruit in per cent of United States production, ])r()jecte(l into the future and multiplied by the estimates of United States production, constitutes the final step in esti- mating future California production. This estimate, in turn, is used as an index of acreage reciuirements for the fruit industry. The irri- gated l;ind rt'fjuirements for the Calilornia fruit intlustry are estimated on the basis of the trends in the area of irrigated and non-irrigated fruit lands described in Chapter IV. A joint analysis of fruit production in California and in the United States made with Dr. S. W. Shear, of the California Agricultural KAIL UK UUtKiAUUN 1>1.\ l-l-tir.Ut,.M 149 Kxporjment Station, has roviMiloil imiM»rtant fncts which uro prrtinciit to thi' analysis of Cnlifornia's no«'«l for irri>rut«Mi land. A 'JOyrar s«Tie*i of (lata on th»> j>ro«lu<'tii)n of imlividnal frnit.s i-onvi-rti'd to a fresh fniit bnsLs ami ooni|>il(>«l by Dr. Shear* iim^''";* - ''•• '>■-•- of this stuounds in IM'J*^. While temperate r.one fruits were nwikin^f this increase in volume of pro«luetion. subtropical fruits increjisetl in volume nearly three tiiiifs. The Volume of product ii»n of all orcharil and viiu'vard fruits reilects this rapi» from .ilioiit 4(KM) million poun«ls in 10O9 to nearly llMMX) ujillion pounds in l'-'- In 192<) fruit pro«luction throui:hout the state fell otT considerably. While the fruit.s were thus expan«led in volume of protluction, alMU)nds and walnuts combined increa^etl in production fronj an otitput .somewhat in excess of 'JO million pounds in llHiy to more than 120 million jxuinds in l'J2S. inasmuch as pounds of fresh fruit are not exactly comi)arable with an equal weijrht of nuts, it has been tho»i<;ht best to carry out future estinuites on the basis of the fruits alone, brinjritijr the percentage of nuts into the jiicture by usinir the future trend of fruit production as an index of fruit an«l nut acn-ajre. These trends are shown j:rai)hically in Fijxures 1, 2 and '.I of I'late XLll. The »lata from which these illu.s- t rat ions have been constructed are given in Table 65. United States Fruit Production. In Table 66 are reeonled the summarize more than doubled '•• " ''ime, I'nited States prodtiction of the sumo ,ts remained lairly nt. It is true that there have been wide variations from y«ar to year and there was evidently a cyclical varia- tion In l'.»14 and 1926 I'nited States pror th-- •' - two periods '■■?;tloned alx.N. »'■• '• '*' "*" *■ ' • Zone fruits . 1 not increave«p|. .. that of grai>es .ind citrus more than doiibled. Thin is to a large extent a reflection of what t.M.k i-laee ir ' to thes*' fruit crops , ■ 'i:.'!! i.f ♦ • rone nn«l tlir.-.- ii: i»f Plate ' I i ' ; ' ij >n .1 1 1111 XLIII. .(i«MtrI'ti"n arifl ftMlrntlr.n In th« 150 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES TABLE 65 CALIFORNIA PRODUCTION OF SUB- TROPICAL AND TEMPERATE ZONE FRUITS In millions of pounds Sub-tropical fruits Temper- ate zone fruits Temper- ate zone Year Grapes Citrus Figs Grapes and citrus Grapes, citrus and figs and sub-trop- ical fruits combined 1909 -- 1.716 1,676 1,641 1,872 1,759 2,118 2,306 2,022 2,444 2,183 2.660 2,546 2,200 3,612 4,060 3,070 4.100 4.258 4,812 4.732 3,502 981 1,373 1,212 532 1,455 1,415 1,384 1,773 796 1,712 1,425 1,993 1,236 1.694 2.216 1.675 2,279 2,589 2,103 3,360 2,173 24 23 33 30 30 39 52 59 52 55 72 74 58 71 63 55 64 78 83 81 102 2,697 3,049 2,853 2,424 3,214 3.533 3,690 3.795 3.240 3,895 4,085 4.539 3,436 5,306 6,276 4,745 6,379 6,847 6,915 8,092 5,675 1 2,721 3.072 2,886 2,454 3,244 3,572 3,742 3,854 3,292 3,950 4,157 4,613 3,494 5,377 6,339 4,800 6,443 6,925 6,998 8,173 5,777 1.409 1,265 1.400 1,775 1,198 1,745 1,717 1,685 2.153 1,655 2,548 2,008 1,894 2,537 2,640 2.411 2,577 i 3,246 3,361 3,804 2.384 4,130 1910 - 4.337 1911 4,286 1912 4.229 1913 4,442 1914 5,317 1915 - 5,459 1916 5,539 1917 — 5,445 1918 5,605 1919 6,705 1920 6,621 1921 5,388 1922 7,914 1923 8,979 1924 7,211 1925- 9,020 1926 10,171 1927 10,359 1928 11,977 1929 8,161 Sources of data: This tabic is the result of a jomt analysis made with Dr. S. W. Shear, Division of Agricultural Economics, Uni- versity of California, of data compiled by the latter. A similar, but more detailed analysis, together with data on individual fruits included, sources of data and methods of compilation, will appear in Shear, S. W., Fruit Production Consumption and Utilization in the United States, California Agr. Exp. Sta. Bulletin (in preparation). All data arc compiled on the basis of fresh-fruit equivalent. Temperate zone fruits include cherrie.s, pears, apricots, apples, peaches, fresh plums and prunes. The vinifera grape, which includes most of California's varieties, citrus fruits, and figs comprise all but a very small percentage of California's sub-tropical fruit acreage. Olives, pomegranates, avo- cados, dates and a few other sub-tropical crops utilize a very small percentage of the sub-tropical acreage. TABLE 66 UNITED STATES PRODUCTION OF GRAPES, CITRUS FRUITS, AND OF TEMPERATE ZONE FRUIT In millions of pounds Year Grapes Citrus Temperate zone fruits Grapes and citrus Temperate tone and sub-tropical 1909. 1910. 1911. 1912. 1913. 1914. 1915. 1916. 1917. 1918. 1919. 1920. 1921. 1922. 1923. 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 2,307 2,073 2.219 2,423 2,145 2,650 2,704 2.379 2,855 2,476 3.121 3,046 2,424 4.162 4,455 3,555 4,404 4,877 S,210 6,342 4.045 1.538 1.871 1,739 1,315 2,311 2,411 2,310 2,815 1.542 2,705 2.540 2,730 2,422 3,186 4,098 3,364 3,657 4,167 3,448 5,501 3,686 9.880 10,190 13,114 15,109 10.102 15.932 15.430 12,325 11.901 11.027 11.323 14.888 7.722 14.620 13,940 12,890 12,598 17.774 10,736 14.953 11.162 3.845 3.944 3,958 3,738 4,456 5,061 5,014 5,194 4.397 5.181 5.661 5,776 4,846 7.348 8,553 6,919 8,061 9.044 8.658 10.843 7.731 13.725 14,134 17.072 18.847 14,558 20,993 20,444 17,519 16.298 16.208 16.984 20.664 12.568 21.968 22.493 19.809 20,659 26,818 19,394 25,796 18,893 Sources of data: This table is the re.sult of n joint analysis made with Dr. S. \V. .Shear, Division of .Agricultural Economics, Uni- versity of California, of data compiled by the latter. A similar, but n\ore detailed analysis, together with data on individual fruit* included, sources of data and methods of compilation, will appear in Shear, S. W., Fruit I'rohurtion, Consumption and Utiliiation in the United Stat«6, California Agr. Eip. Sta. Bulletin (in preparation). RATK OK lURIOATlON Dl-tNEUH'MKNT 1')! I'hllr XI. U 140 PRODUCTION OF CAUFORNtA ALMONDS AND WALNUTS COMBINED • » T r909 1914 91* Year t92* 029 Q.000 ■OOjOOO a^ooo 60O0 PRODUCTION OF CALIFORNIA SUB-TROPICAL AND TEMPERATE ZONE FRUITS 'fotrtfit tan* and ««^trapical S29 PRODUCTION OF CALIFORNIA GRAPES AND CITRUS FRUITS 5.0CC I I > I 1 riOURC 3 vooc 3.CC0 2.000 nn 152 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Ratio of California Production to United States Production of Orchard and Vineyard Fruits. Figure 1 of Plate XLIV and Table 67 show the California production of imi)ortaut orchard and vineyard fruits in per cent of United States l^roduction of the same fruits. The average percentage for grapes increased from about 75 in 1909 to more than 92 in 1927, and then droi^iied to 87 ; for grapes and citrus combined from about 70 in 1909 to .SO in 1927, dropped to 73 in 1929. The ratio of California citrus fruit production to the United States production of citrus fruits has declined sliglitly. The percentage for temperate zone fruits has increased from about 14 to approximately 31 in 1927. dropped to 21 in 1929, while for all orchard and vineyard fruits combined the trend of this ])ercentage has increased from 30 to 43. The projection of this trend into the future constitutes one of the most difficult steps in the procedure of estimating future land require- ments. Figure 1 of Plate XLIV shows two possible projections. The line forming the upper margin of the shaded portion of the illustration is the estimated California production, in per cent of that of- the United States, which would be required if California should provide all of the increase in the United States during the next 40 years. The horizontal line forming the lower margin of the shaded area is the average California prodnction, in per cent of that of the United States, for the past five years. These are not presented as upper and lower limits of probable future production. There could occur an actual reduction in the acreage of fruit in the United States outside of California, which would make it possible for California to exceed the estimate indicated by the upper line. On the other hand, there might TABLE 67 PERCENTAGE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES PRODUC- TION OF ORCHARD AND VINEYARD FRUITS, 1909-1929 Year Grapes Grapes and citrus Citrus Temperate zone fruits Temperate zone and sub tropical fruits 1909 74.38 80.85 73.95 77.26 82 00 79.92 85 28 84.99 85.60 88.17 85.23 83.59 90.76 86.79 91.13 86.36 03 10 87 31 92.36 88 58 86 58 70 14 77.31 72.08 64 85 72 13 69 81 73 59 73 07 73 69 75.18 72.16 78.58 70 90 72 21 73 38 68.58 79 13 75.71 79 87 74 63 j 73 41 63 78 73 38 69.70 41 98 62.96 58.69 59 91 62.98 51.62 63.29 56 10 73.00 51 03 53 17 54 08 49 79 62 32 62 13 60.99 61 08 58.95 14 26 12 41 10 68 11.75 11 86 10 95 11 13 13 67 18 09 15 01 22 50 13 49 24 53 17 35 18 94 18.70 20 46 18 26 31 31 25.44 21 36 30 09 1910 30 68 1911 25 11 1912 22 44 1913 30 51 1914 25 33 1915 26 70 1916 31 61 1917 .33 41 1918 34 58 1919 39 48 1920 32 04 1921 42 87 1922 36 03 1923 39 E2 1924 36 40 1925 43.66 1926 37.03 1927 53 41 1928 46 43 1929 43 20 Sources of data: Tliia talilo is the result of a joint analysis made with Dr. S. W. Shear, Divbion of AKricuttural Economics, Uni- versity of C^alifornia, of data compiled by the latter. A similar, but more detailed analysis, togethor with data on individual fruits im'luiied, .sources of data and methods of compilation, will appear in .Shear, S. \V., Fniit I'rodi:"''^ — Consumption and t'tiliintion in the I'nitwl .'^tatcs, Cnlifornin Agr. I'xp. Sta. Bulletin (in pre|»arationV duction. KATK ... i.vu... » . ..».N' UKNKIAM'MKNT 1 ' '^ oofur a doolino in tin* rntio of Cnlifornin prcHluction to that of the I'nited Stat«'N to n poijit ImMow thi* a\rrjiir»' in' ' l)y tho lower linr. Th<«s«> who hiivr inv>' •••• ■••••I thr ••oiuiomit -.li.ifion <»f thf fruit in^lu^^rit^s h»lu>vi> that .ttrr is iniu-h luort" likrly to take place. Th»\v point otjt the possibility of shifts in tln' relative demand for .litTerent kinii»l>t n'sult in a <]eeline in the pHnlue- tioii and consumption <>f some fruit Ini — '• 'rown in California. No sueh shift is at present indieat«'il |>y i\ ~ I.- statistics, howevt-r. A ntluction in exports result injr from increase . . . ...;h respect to total production is ■ :l'«*ted in per capita production. The cycb* which has just recently pa.ssed its maximum is probably not complete. The averape for the ;• t-* .1. . M.'. t) .. ", . . is pi-, ' ' not comparable with that of the j)rc\;<.u.s tln.i.i. . i\_iire ? XLIV and Table (H -i >> these variations in per capita pt n of fruits in the Unite*! Per apita prmluction of temi>erate zone fruits has been downward, but •' • '" ' !i an !• '"t to L anil citrus fruits, ■ i..> J. ,.. ,M' ?'■■• ■ I....... ,. sub-tropical proup. Although there i in the trend of the l>er capita pnMluction of fruit, the average of Ih'J pounds for the past ' • .... . j^^ ^^^ .^^ estimating fiiture .< ..• . ■ :t...- .: I .. this ten year I»e«'n one m > Ih'cu abnor- Mially larpe. This av- nultiplied by Tnitetl States populatiori ■_'iv»»H H trend i»; in be proJM'twI into the luture on fh«' ' on It will !>«• < - jMiunds is eijfht pounds "•ss than the ;. r the thn-' in2r> nn«l l!>27. In other h the • ' mi .•_•> III"! <• fruit •v.i^ ; >r*> or since. The year 1'' I vear of the deeline which s«'em« to have set in. If history ot per - •' ri*«Iuee per ., .: ;'»n. .V '" '■ e.ipitji I' l.').'! rea«'h. d in 1?»20. bnt t ih a year of low Mejd per acre and the 154 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Plate XLIII 16^00 16.000 (A.OOO UNITED STATES PRODUCTION OF TEMPERATE ZONE AND SUB-TROPICAL FRUITS 1929 6,000 UNITED STATES PRODUCTION OF GRAPES -1 — I — I — <— 1909 1914 1919 Year 1924 1929 UNITED STATES PRODUCTION OF CITRUS FRUITS 6,000 1 1 1 1 1 — 4,000 2.000 I I 1 _1 I I L. 1909 1914 1919 Year 1924 1929 BATS or IKKUiATIUN l>i:Vt:U)l'MKNT rintr xr.iv PLRCENTAGt RELATION BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES PRODUCTION OF ORCHARD AND VINLYARD FRUITS. SHOWING POSSIBLF FUTURE PROJECTION '9 60 50 A A ./ K « 40 cS 30 10 n \n A ^ Kf^ r 1 1 :....! 1910 l9iS 1920 \n% 1930 I91i 1940 i94i I9M I9SS t9M IMS 1970 Year UNITED STATES PER CAPITA PRODUCTION OF IMPORTANT GROUPS OF ORCHARD AND VINEYARD FRUITS 1909 - 1929 ncuRC 2 m% 156 DIVISION OF WATEH RESOURCES TABLE 68 UNITED STATES PER CAPITA PRODUCTION OF IMPORTANT GROUPS OF ORCHARD AND VINEYARD FRUITS, 1909-1929 Year Temperate zone fruits, grapes and citrus Temperate zone fruits Grapes and citrus combined Grapes Citrus 1909 150.0 151.7 180.7 196.0 148.2 210.5 202.3 170.8 156.9 155.1 160.7 192.4 115.2 198.5 199.6 173.3 178.4 228.6 163.2 214.4 155.1 107.9 109.4 138.8 157.1 102.9 159.8 152.7 120.1 114.6 105.5 107.1 138.6 70.8 132.1 123.7 112.8 108.8 151.5 90 4 124.3 91.6 42.0 42.3 41.9 38.9 45.4 50.8 49 6 50.6 42.3 49.6 53.6 53.8 44.4 66 4 75.9 60.5 69.6 77.1 72.9 90.1 63.5 25.2 22.3 23.5 25.2 21.8 26.6 26 8 23.2 27.5 23.7 29.5 28.4 22.2 37.6 39.5 31.1 38.0 41.6 43.9 44.4 33.2 16.8 1910 - 20.1 1911 18.4 1912 13.7 1913 23 5 1914 24.2 1915 22.9 1916 - 27 4 1917 14.8 1918 25.9 1919 - 24.0 1920 - 25.4 1921 22.2 1922 28.8 1923 36.4 1924 29.4 1925 31.6 1926 35 5 1927 29.0 1928 - -- 45.7 1929.. - 30.3 Sources of data: This table is the result of a joint analysis made with Dr. S. W. Shear, Division of Agricultural Economics, Uni- versity of California, of data compiled by the latter. A similar, but more detailed analysis, together with data on individual fruits included, sources of data, and methods of compilation, will appear in Shear, S. W., Fruit Production, Consumption and Utilization in the United States, California Agr. Exp. Sta. Bulletin (in preparation). small figure did not indicate so great a curtailment in average fruit- producing poAver of the orchards of the country. Future Requirements for Irrigated Land in California for Orchard and Vineyard Fruits. On llu! basis of United States per capita production and the ratio of California production to United States production, it has been estimated that the normal demand for orchard and vineyard fruits in California will increase during the next three decades at the rate of approximately a billion pounds per decade. Estimates of demand for acreage, how- ever, must take into consideration })resent over-expansion. Table 69 shows the trend in the estimated acreage required for the California fruit industry. Between 1910 and 1920 the California bearing acreage of orchard and vineyard fruits and nuts increased 230,000 acres. During tlie same decade the increase in the irrigated acreage of the same fruits increased 218,000 acres, indicating that two decades ago the principal means of expanding the fruit acreage was by irrigation. It is true that many orchards have been irrigated that were not tlien irrigated. In 1909, '.Ui.7 per cent of the orchard and vineyard fruits and nuts was irrigated, while in 1919, ol per cent was irrigated. Acreage exi)ansion in tlie t'niit industry either means more irrigated land, or else less irrigated hind used for othei- crops. It is estimated tliat the uniri'igated acreage of orchards and vineyards is approximately 4S0.()00 acres, and that tliis will remain fairly constant. Tliere is some ])0ssibili1y ol" its declining If it li.id reiimiiied constant during the last RATK OF IRRUiATIOK I>KVKI^>I'MKNT 15- TAilLE M tSTIMATEO FimfRi: TRI SOS IN TlfV niMAND FOR BEARINCi AOtMACE OF ORaiARO \Ni>\iNMvHi sO NUTS IN CALIFORNIA Y«M ! • \mt rma tar fruH m nuUtoiK tndoaMad for fruil -■'•■*. nut M<« "'XMM:-J ll.3;n I3.41S 1. 1. 13.33 14.043 2. 110 laio .J ^>. ..^ k«*i> roxinintcly _ _ . . ... ;. . .. it and niits. This will nn'an that by IIMO wp will Ix" able to absorb an additional SO.OOO acres. Diirinfr the decade from 1940 to 19r»0 we may b«' able to add another ls.").()(K) acres. Cor- lin? estimates for the two followinir decades are I.'J'j.OOO and I acres, respectively. These must l)e rccoirnized as havinir 'AS precision as the period to which they apply becomes more remote. LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR VEGETABLES Esiimatcs of future land requirements in California for vejfctables have bern baxd upi'ii fr-ii'Is in per capita consumption, i-.stimated futiire !■■'■"' ition ni' tl • It!,,! m^t,^ aiul trends in tlie ratio of Cali- fornia .. '■ to I'niti ^ '■ of important veffetable crops. Inrpiiry also has been made concernintr the comparative advantage for :•■:;•■ ..■■(■'■ ' uie reccM/nition has been •.-;.....;._ ' •' vefjrtable jrrowinu' on a _ ^ ■ . lon;r di- up of < and cons«»fpient spe- -iali/ation by (feoi?raphical divisions of the country in the prodiiction n( \ ' ' ' new into the problem of '■ " ... h as ti. luse one to realize the with respect to any part of our iry el iirricultural industrv Per Capita Acr«ago of Vagctablct. If IKT capita acreage of vi finue to ir a.s it ) •onsi.stenl with •n. In 1' s in the T'nite*! States should eon- it w«iuld Im« ai>out \- '"'ir as it is irc. It M n the human diet and past con- ,. 1, i-» • li •Th« United 8tat<« mentkfm (or 1»M. 1»1>. and ttS4 and <.47S.OOO r*sp«ctlv*ty. war* 4.O1.00*. l.tSI.OOO. 158 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES It must be emphasized that the small vepretable garden has made these figures rather inieertain. The commercial truck-garden area has been growing so ra]ndly tliat for this and other reasons statistics on the growtli of acreage utilized for vegetables are not as reliable as for other crops. It is estimated that tlie per capita acreage of vegetables in the United States will be 0.059 in 1940, 0.061 in 1950, 0.063 in 1960, and 0.065 in 1970. Ratio of California Acreage to Tliat of the United States. Just as the California production was compared to United States production in the case of fruits, the trend in the ratio of California vegetable acreage to that of the United States was determined and l)rojected into the future. Table 70 has been prepared to show the trend in the ratio of California acreage to that of the United States. Tlie acreages given in Table 70 do not contain all of the vegetable crops. Altliough the major part of tlie vegetable crops is represented, only those have been included which have made possible the comparison of California acreage with that of the United States. The ratio of Cali- fornia vegetable acreage to that of the United States is now a little more than 0.06. It is estimated that this ratio will increase to 0.08 in 1970. This is probablj^ a hazardous prediction because, unlike Cali- fornia fruits which are already about 47 per cent of United States production, California vegetable production could become a much greater percentage than the estimated 0.08. It is believed that estimate is sufficiently low. TABLE 70 RATIO OF CALIFORNIA VEGETABLE ACREAGE TO UNITED STATES VEGETABLE ACREAGE, 1919-1928 Year 1 United States acreage 2 California acreage 3 Ratio of column 2 to column 1 1919 5,338,660 5.567.090 5,762,480 6,429,570 5,831,220 5,700,000 5,137,031 5,185.110 5,647,040 5,960,480 234.020 251.010 200.430 239.790 229.160 239.370 263.440 305,550 360,710 362,800 .044 1920 .045 1921 .035 1922 .037 1923 . . .039 1924 .042 1925 .051 1926 .059 1927 .064 1928 .061 Sources of data: In order to get United States acreage.s that were comparable to those of California, the acreages of nine importan vegetables were used. These include asparagus, cantaloupes, cauliflower, celery, lettuce, onions, peas, potatoes, sweet potatoes, tomatoos and watcrniclona. Acreages for the United States are from U. .S. Dept. of .\gr. Yearbook of Agriculture, 11123. pagf- 759; Yearljook 1!)25, page 913; Yearbook 1928, pages 789-807. Acreages for California arc from California Crop licporta for 1923, 1920 and 1928. Estimates of future California acreage determined by multiplying this ratio by estiniatod l"uture United States acreage gave results that would necessitate" a decline in California per capita vegetable acreage. This is probably because white potatoes, which are included, are declin- RATE OF IIUUOATION DEVKUM'MENT 159 in{? in acreap* in California. California will probably continue to produce most of her own vetfotnbles and to ship a cotisidrrabb' amount to otlu'r states. The t ' California per capita aereaj;e is aoniewhat i:reater than the corr' na fi^:;- •' r the Ciiited States. The per ■ ai.ita production, eX' of \u< . probably will remain hijfher b«*causo of an expected increase in per capita consiimption of vcjfetables, California's rec«»jrni/ed seii.sonal advanta(;e in the production of ve^'c- tid)les at a time when most desired by eastern markets, the unlimited opportunity for the expansion of vegetables even at the expense of other crops and the larjrer percentairo of the days in the year when fresh vepetablcs may be obtained by the California population. Future Requirements. Csinsj the estimate of future rnited States popidation ^iven in Chafi- tiT II and the per I'apita acreage of vem'tabb-s as estinuited for the next four decadt»s. estimates have been made of future vegetable acreafje in the United States. Apjtlyinfr to these the estimated ratio of California acreaire to that of the T'nited States, California veijetable aereaire for 1940 would become 561,000; for 1950. 6S7.000; for 1900. SOl.OOO. and for 1970, S90,000 acres. The.se are conservative estimates and would be exceeded should California {jreatly expand lier vepetable markets. To provide the area indicated above, it will I>e necessary to add d»irin«r the decaile 1930-1940 about 90.000 acres to the vc^retablc aereajre. lietween 1940 and 1950. TJti.OoO aerev would be ad. led. between 19.")() and 1900 approximately 124.000. and between 1960 and 1970 the additional recjuirement would droj) to 89.000. The lower increase for the last d- cide would result from tlie declining rates of population trrowth predicted. Requirements for Irrigated Land for Vegetables. Information needed to determine what i>art of this increase in vepetable aereape will be on irrigated land is not available. The 1909 irrigation census did not s- ' '•* aer.at'e hs in 1919. In that year about 53 per cent i-; ^ exccjjt potatoes, were irri- pat«fl. The 91 per cent increase in \ le aereape durinp the paat decade has probably been to a larpe extent on irripateeet.s and cotton all will take second place in compari.son with fruits, vepetables and the pnxluction of non-importable dairy products in competinp for irripatci] land. 160 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES The utilization of cottonseed products by the live stock industry will tend to aid cotton in holding its own in this compr'tition. However, the many possible substitutes for cottonseed products make it doubtful if this coiiunoditv. which has made siicii strides in recent vears, will be able to continue its increase in acreage after th(^ present period of over- ]>roduction lias passed. Sugar beet acreage in the future will be governed by success in com- bating the beet leafhopper and by the world wide economic situation with i"es]-)ect to sugar production, tariff regulations, etc. Beans are largely grown on land of peculiar adaptation. There is some flexibility to this acreage, but the present bean acreage may be expected to remain fairly constant except for certain varieties grown on irrigated land and under varied climatic conditions. Much of the bean acreage is subject to serious erosion and soil fertility depletion. It may be said that of the miscellaneous field crops, in the long run, land producing beets and cotton may be expected to give way to that used for producing fruit, vegetables and dairy products, while the bean acreage maj' continue about as at present. The rate of this shift will depend upon available lands and prices of the different competing crops. Prices in the long run, while subject to wide variations from normal, will be governed by the growth of population, while land use Avill be influenced by its adaption in comparison with competing areas. The controlling influence will be the character of available lands. Before summarizing the results of the various chapters, therefore, it will be well to compare land requirements for agriculture as a whole with estimates of available acreage. n\ry iir ii;i;iii i riov iir\ i:t.oi-Mr\T le ;i'?-ijii> f|ii' differ'"?'' I'Li-^vi-x" nf land. For examph'. irrijrated land may or may not include pra.ss lands that ; ive a very s»i|)erticial irrifration at certain times durinj; the year. t ertain prain lands may receive a sinjile tloodiu).' durinj? the early part of the .season when water supplies are pI'Mitiful. These, too. are often included. The ditlicult point is that such irri>;ation merpes impercepti- bly info the more intensive application of water to well prepared land. Then thi-re is land which may n<»t l>e irrigated in any piven year, but whi<'h is prepared for irrigation and is irrigated when water is avail- able. The intent of the (»wri<'r nuiy be to irrigate it in the future. He may have irrigated it in the pa.st. So the question as to what constitutes irripatcil land has intPMlueeil diKcrepancies into fipun»s already subject to error Ix'cause of the ilifficulty of collection. The available ilatu will s.rvi- as an approximatr yuid<' as to the amount of land which is irrigated, but for the purpose of «leterminini» trends which may Ik* projeeteii into the futtire they shoidd be usefl •autiou.sly b«'«'aiiM* «»f the different meanings piven to the term "irri- •d land" in the different conn ' fis. Kates f»f irrigation vii.iiN are with e?«timat«*s of the entire area irripated, now or in the pa.Ht, and which ho-H not Inn^n aban«Ioned. 11— ', i.i to indii-ati' qnantilativrly how :.., \ \v«» nuiy «\\pp<'t expansion to take plniT in th«' fufnnv nor an* they an arruratc nn'a>nn' of ratos I'f (lt'V(>h)pn)(>nt in thi' i I'ahh' 7- is pn'S(>nt(*(l to make i)ovsil)Ii' a • inalitative comparison oi im rat«>s of growth in difTcnMit t'r \Ki \ IN AtJll S IN TlfF SACMAMI MO 1'.4 SkMU ; mi \* ' 4r..v'. ' . !.«% : ■ "v» Moiiatiin \aUc>i ■ •! 'Ifir. ! :. v.. ■ !■ . * ' IB '■-^ i« li« l^y c u^ ! A4~il 4nj^ uu, . SaartMif 4Mi: tot IHM to 191?. frtJO t^ • • . -. r.«,rT-.,>r,( I.. Ik, -.l.l, frf .^r^ . .,*^ Irrigable Land in the San Joaqum and Sacranr>«nto Vallaya. In I'J'J!' the lantlK of tho San .loaqnin ami Sacraim-ntn vnlh-ys \v«tp rlavsificd by tho .Stntr Knuim-or. Tl mal pjirpos*- of this claNsi- ,- .• I t 111. ,11 t| ...,,,, ,. , |„ ,|,,t 'I lit ililiti'ii' : '- •• ;<» th«* (h'siirn .. tnil the (Icti-rminaiinn of ' •■\ of reservoirs. In th*- Saj-ramento Valley the land cl.i tion was ma«'s «• •. the luiul rVKI> with many rosiTvationn. For this hiri;*' hoss4jry to pay particular att»'niion to th«' riovation an Tubrr Fnr»cn I.» 1,000 ■4.ii«] 843.000 I.3T8.0O0 }.(M)0 • I •! «Ua and hi-'- ■* — '— — rTr-r^ '••-.■•^n ioc irT »rM lapphni b)r tb* 9UU FjigtMar'* «abt»ud inwilnl M«M. (imHmy) UaiR^kM Landt Available for Immediate Development. A small part of the total is available for drvelopmont at th«> pri««'nt time, having water >upply and iV This area lirs for the !i • rt in t' Tthrrn por* ■ \' " \ . It is • . :.. d tha' i 'nr nr- _ „ ^ -trictK of lin and Contra Costa eountii's there an* s of irriuat)li' lan.«>' works for thr South of M main eanal ii stands readv • > ♦ lfi() DIVISIOX OF WATER RESOURCES development with the arc.'is ali-cady cropped in Fresno, Tulare and Kern counties, for which there now is so urgent an appeal for addi- tional water su]iiilies. These include in-i^Mted lands in the Alta and Foolhiil districts: the Kaweah Delta ai-ea ; the Exeter and Lindsay area; the Tule River and Deer Creek area, and the Earlimart area, all in eastern Fresno and Tnlai-e counties, embracing: about 260.000 acres of irripfated land for which there has Ijccn an increasing: annual shortage of water. There are also some iri-igated lands south of these in Kern County, involvinj? apjn-oximately (iO.OOO acres, on which the water supply is critical. In IMadera County about 80,000 acres of irrigated lands are also deficient in their water supply. If Avater is ])rovided for areas now jilanted to intensive crops in Kern County, for which there is a deficiency, and to the undeveloped lands adjacent to them, additional areas, amounting to some 825,000 acres, would be made available immediately for development under irrigation. Tn othei- words, the importation of water into the San Joaquin Valley on a scale that would provide not oidy for the deficiencies of lands now irrigated, but also for the undeveloped lands .so situated that they could easily avail themselves of the new water supply, Avould mean that more than a million acres of fertile soil, including the 712, 000 mentioned above, would become immediately subject to development. But we are a long way from accounting for all of the 3,671,000 acres given as the estimated total of unirrigated irrigable land in the San Joaquin Valley. The balance is subject to develoinnent, but at a inuch greater cost for additional water sujjplies or for diversion works. Some of this remaining area is so situated, either in elevation or in distance from water supplies that may become available, that the chances for its becoming irrigated land are very remote indeed. It is e.stimated there are about 1,094.000 acres so situated. But in the inter- mediate class are 1.180.000 acres. This includes lands which could be irrigated by Avater from the adjacent mountains, should imjiorted water become available to bo substituted for the irrigation of lands now served by these sui>plies. lUit to make this acreage available, storage, diversion works and pumping plants must be constructed at cos-ts additional to those incident to importing the supjilies fi'oni the Sacramento Valley. In Table 76 the estimated segregation of the unii'rigatd irrigable area of the San Joacpiin Valky has been summarized so that the reader may obtain at a glance the relative magnitude of the different areas subject to development under the conditions described. This .segregation was the result of approximate estimates made in the lield. Contour maps and ilata obtained from local authorities, together with the land clas-^ificalion nuule by the Slate Engineer's otifice, have been llie ])asis of the estimates, h uiusl l)e i-ecognized that there is a Iwiliiilit y.ouo between each of the cla.ssideations as to remoteness of development which time alone can i)lace on a definite basis. What con- tour shall mark the limit of ec(Uiomic development can oidy be a matter of arbiti-ary jud«^iiient at I lie pi-esenl. The criteria which have been used in the segi'eo;it ion. however, have been fairly definite. In Kern County all those lands lying al)o\-e apjiarently feasible diversion from the Kei-n Kiver were plai-ed in the remote clas> ■. of »|i'v»»!o|Mii»'nt FiirtluT ' th I'xiNfin-.' ii!i:i; inw rnunls of • ' w tin* limits : k«*»l out in piMi ; !.■•• I' Ii.i- In. Ii li;i\f ln-iii - i in innkin;; i 1 MU I -h ESTIMATl-D ARI:a 1>F L»NIRRU;ATtn IRRItiAULI LANI> IN Tilt SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY IN OROUt OF AVAIL AHILl TV FOR OKViXOPMENT. I«>2«» V .-'• i:s.om ' ' • Till Ir ■at' 71X000 S3S,000 profiOMU Sale f'l 1.ISO.O0O 2U.0OO I.OM.OOO >ul «aimc>(c:i uw i' .• rr|«n-t luru*^ \i\r lunimcr m iaiO. ESTIMATED AREA OF UNIRRIGATED IRRIGABLE LAND IN THE SACRAMENTO RIVER BASIN In tli«' SjK'ninu'nto |{iv»'r bHsin I iIhti' an* approxinmtoly '..l'.MI.(MM) ■ Kvcn mori- important than in tl. , '' ■■ _;!iration of this- ar«'a into rhi» portions uliirh m;iy bo availahlt* for irri'/ation (l«*Vflopin«*nt uiubT nnt ronditi' \Iuch of thin 3.1!M).tMM) ai-n-s has such remote ' ' ' ... J. jii^, juTcap" witli- It is estima "^a«-ramento \ ml CO' . HO > • he i>T! iyiiiff k>e .plyinjj watt-r »• illation «>f farm he • IN Iw of ll ?hes»' InniU many hav<» ; - 'lilt' of tl f nnii „ thle land in the pri>pos«>w»rvoir system -»n districts, . ... i i... .. . " -^ without MIS of mMuey in I' 'r works to the individiiHl farms. The ints nr even minor distrihu- *n,., f„,.| nm^t not l>e .11 works serving It mils' jdso In* rfali74* on tlie basis of data com- l)iled by lhe State Engineer's ofllce. LAND REQUIREMENTS AND LAND AVAILABLE In tlie two interior valleys combined, including adjacent plains and foothills, thei-e ai-e a|>pi-o.\inuitely 6.i)00.00() acres of unirrigated irri- g.ible land. If tliese hinds were known to be of the same grade as those already under irrigation, if they were all adaptable to the crops which will be neetieil, and if they could be irrigated at costs comparable to prevailing costs foi- water, the pi-oblem of estimating land i-equirements lor tlir future would be somewhat simplified. RATE OK IKKHJATION HKX Kl.oi'MKNT 160 TAIU-I rt bSTIMATKO AHI A oK I SIMHK.MI l> IHHK.AHt I l.ANI> IN Till S\l H \MI Nil) HIVI H M\SlN, I**."* (•,.:,!;•... >^ MMy b* imgaUtl \oM aiadr (or iha rvfiort durug Um nimaMr of lOO. TAlJLt TH IMRRICATED IRRIGABLI LAND IN THE SAC RAMINTO RIVKR BASIN Includins entire Sacr*mento-S«n Joaquin Delta Ciroup Ifri^Bhbarw in acrai Inipaini ana in m-TT» 1 r. ir- im«>mt«a1 Vifcv Flonr Footbil] »fr» awaniiile aaH tiaa ioaquia Mu ■>'.<. .c»«l i.i,.ia>i ViK..iia> .•.iiri.iM) i:«.'«w •"'.ICO TaUb. 4 .v.#,.i«i( 1.074,000 j.iso.m*) bet of tfita and baut of Mtii tmoUr km* (rt> < lmou ••^' ■ Uwiitfa Land Requircmentt. It is iMiiimtiMl that tht* lulditional n'<|uiremrnts for irri^attMl Innd for fruits. vi't'i'taM's an, will l»' a littlf in ^ of flu- «M|uivalrMt of a half i..i:.n»n aiTi'N.* that th«> atl-lilioiial n ot a iiiillion a<*n->. aixl that during tho next to years, the |M-ri(N| from 10:(0-l!i70. alMiiit two ami a half million ai*rt>s. .'it he 'If ly -, of 1 land 170 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES liaviii> Land Utilization in Sacramento Valley Irritjation Districts. It is estimated that there are 424,000 acres which are irrigable in the iiTigation disti-icts ol" the Sacramento \'alley, of which ai)proximately ] 24,000 were irrigated in 1!)2!), leaving ;{00.000 acres of unirrigated iri-igable lands. In these same in-igal)Ie districts there are 1411,700 KATE OF IRKKUTION' OKVKI.MpMKNT 171 aiTt's I'lassifHtl as tir^t fla.vi* ami IJ2,7lH) «> sivoiul class land. Thrn? an» als hi>avy soils adapted to ri(*e culture. Within thf-M- irriuMtion distrii-ts urv I't.'AH) nrrvs of orchards, vine- yards, alfalta. Muian ;rrass aiul truck cro|>s. prohahly t»ro\\ini; for the most part «)n tirst class land. Some of it. however, is (»n second class and som«> on third class lanii. .Most of thi> rice is found on s4><'ond and •Jiird class land (J rain is found urowint' <»n all classes excc|)t tin- fourth and tifth Tiir conclusion :h;it can he draNMi from this iiuM>mplete picture is that instead of the unirri^'ated irri^'ahle land in these districts havinir :{."» per cent of its irriurahlc area on first class land, as now is the case for the total area of irrii.'jd>le lanil in the Sacramento Valley. th«' distrihution is more likclv to include oidv :{() per cent of first class land, with the balance distributed amon^ the lowi-r cbivses. In other wonls, the averaire f|uality w ill be lower. A superficial examiiuition of the soil !i:;!]> in th»' fi«'ld where ^'rowiji^' crops may l>e observed will lead to the same conchision. Kveji the first class land within these tlislricts which is yet unirrijrated probably has a lower av«'raj:e pro serve tar enoutrh to predict the aiMition to Jm» made from that source, init preli ments of thosi- intimately in touch with tl' ' ' inent lutinai'- .i povsible addition of 4n maclr by th« 172 . Dn'ISION OF WATER RESOURCES \'jilley is an indication of croj) ada])tation for all of the irrigable area, then only 60 per cent of the irrigable area will be adapted to the pro- duction of orchards, vineyards, alfalfa and vegetables. About 30 per cent of the cro]ipod area is in orchard and vineyard, while an equal amount is in alfalfa and truck croi)s. Of course, present utilization is not an accurate indication of future adaptation of the lands unirri- gated at pres'ent. The fact remains that our total area of unirrigated irrigable land is not availablt- for ])i'n(1n('ing fruit, vegetables and butterfat. AN IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT POLICY The increase predicted in irrigated acreage for the future can result in a perpetual condition of oversupply of agricultural production; or our ]-)olicy of iri-igation development may, if carefully drawn up, assist in bringing about a stabilization of expansion so that it will be more nearly in accordance with the condition of the market. On the other hand, a period of undersupply with consequent high prices might be as fatal to the California indus-try as an oversujiply. The generation of another vicious cycle of over-expansion would surely result from abnormally high prices. There is always danger, during such periods of the development, of com]ieting areas which remain in production to aggravate the situation when prices fall again. Our policy nuist not be a narrow one, therefore, of looking on only one side during these pessimistic times. We can plan now for the next period of over- expansion much more easily than we can cure the evils of the present one. It is just as important to prevent a period of abnormally high prices as one of abnormally low prices. "We must progress with irriga- tion development as nearly as possible in accordance with the demand for the products of irrigated land. \imm:\|)!\ \ APPENDIX A T«l»l«*s lA to '.'A jrivi' estimates of in-t efTretive iiniiii^ratioti sluiwiiij; tietnils of ooinjuitatioii. In «'ach of tlir taMos except for tlie deiNule 1!)'J()H>:10 eohiinns 'J and <» jrive population l»y ape. sex and nativity obtaim'd liy adjust int; popula- tions for the resptH'tive ajr«' jrroups from the I'. S. Depart miMit of Com- nitri'«'. Hiin'au of thi* Census. Census <»f Population for IKSI). IMM), llMMl. i;»l() and l!>2n. Thi^ adjustment was made hy distrihtitinu' num- l»ers of persons of unknown aj;e amounsus. U. S. Life Tables 1890. 1!»()1. I'.no ami 11M)1 to 1:>1(). Table !«». pajje SSi Table LM. page 9*2; Table 'JH, pape 96: Table 2r>. pa<^'e KM). Inited Stales (loverninent Printing Ofliee, l!»lll. In each of the aliove cited life tables column L'. ^Mvinvr values lor Ix. have Ix^i'U umhI. Data for eomputinp survivors for th«' ape proup 0-4, foreipn. not l>einp available, the sjime factor was usrer inu.ooo for the dei-ade 1920 to 19:10. as shown in Tabic 9A. were cora- ■ uteii fnun Foudray. Klbertie. Department of Commerce, jtureau of the 'cnsus. W S. Abriilped Life Tables 1919 1920. Tal)le .">. pape 16; Life TabI r California. Table .• l.S; Life Tibh- 6 for California. 'Iiv»-u 111 Column :i -ur ; • i i'»*i.000 r< pr«'scnt the nuitdxTs livinp .if the end of a d'cjide -Mi -i lOO.OOO at the bc<;inninp of the decade. Vi'i efTeetive immi:;ration piven in <'olumn 7 has Ix-cn computed by stib- • iiifinp the survivors in each particular ape proup from the total ded census poiiulation for that ap«' protip at the en oo — oooioa — »cc*^^co>O^^CT>c■>^-a5^»— oo o b- 00 ec c^i CO c*3 ^- c^ —' 00^— — ^O'^OCJiO'ff ~ r: lOTJ^- 000SW5!0O»00ie00iCiCscCC^O»0^»'^« r*Occ»or-oooocsQooot^oooi^««-« cDcooo^rr-r— c^coc^oict>.Ci^f*occco 0«rtOiOOU20*00*OOiCOW30»pOW30 ^H^NC^c^eoco^'^'»ftW3cocor^t^ooooa6a30 s.. 0= ■>2 0^ CO eoO'— '05coco'X>tooscor*^^0!rMoioicc^uD'^0 if^OlOO'— 'O''»*OC*4CiOOCCC0O»r3OC0i0Ot^ Ot--»C0003iOCOOSt^OO— ' O C^ 00 -^ c^ ^■^ OJiO<:0MOC500:0O'^C0»O'-HC0C0 ■ ^fei ^«^K rs_ f^ t^ nr^ vm ^^ f^i t>^ r^k ^*^ ^J ^^ ^^ 4cco^^co^-oo■rr.--^oi^^ococ^^ — .— 1 S i/5CO»«OSNCOOOOO«OCOO^^Oai«COcOCOOOOC^OS t'-OJOOOOOOiOS^— "lOtOCOOOCiC^OHDOOcO'— 'W OlCOiOC^OOOiCOOOOC^OCO^-OOt^CO (SI rr --••->wc^coco'V'««*ciftcocoh»r-QOoooic»'^ J9 o H a 8 o H HATK OK IKHixAii.rS i>i O.I,«U"M KNT 177 I t > P < Z c X < / 2 [I ' 7S 11 I < "5 p z .3IB8BBa5»'-«='' 'i ' f M P» ^ (-* -:;ai' ^**»**-»r^*^«****^»%** • -r -^ --; ; **■?.-<■ t? « R 'i.=- a n z c * - - -^ - - At 1 '^=-'^"^=^"--"- i« \ ■t I I I J! -8 I II Si ] till i -,»*^-.--.-.---,iiS 11^ 178 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES < U < o o o ON 00 H Z X w Ui O < O H O Z o u U < Q u H D a o u z a; o b < u o H z w z o w Oi u 0. z DQ UJ > H < z b O Z o < o ^ H U U fe HI H 1^ oS O oc g:_ GO O^ cc 1-^ -^ O O^ re -r -f"M — i»ri r~ nri f>v^ rf^ rvi _m _m ..m _m ^ CO C-l •— ^- »-^ .-" .-^ .2o 1-^ Co O CT> >00 ■I ■ O 03 ^Cfl^Okft r-^t'- ^— Oco c^cc t-^ic CM ^r ^^ o oo ooo ^ ic oo o lOM o t^ TT ci ^ 00C^m00(©'^«DW5OO'S'^h*'-«OO»OO500 OCOC^COlMr— OC'^QOCCCCCOI^CliCCO .-•'-i'MCMeccO'^"«j'ioii5f©cor-.t~-ooooosoa II I I I III I iiil'11114- '^ cc i-*t-«^«Or*C^«DOSCMOOO^^CC'^001CMCiOcC CM -^2 r*OOOOrOt~*iC»0-^tOCDC^t^01^^0'^OS^'— 'OO I^OOt:OOOC^^rrc*lC5C3iOi«5--<_(>-^CONCDCl < — 22 ^^^-CMc-»cceQ'TT'9''Soa^^ .§ V 15. •g o -J 3 c O o SS-S ^£8^ KATK OK IKKIDATION I>KVI:M>i*MKNT 1711 i > i g ft «S Is I i '- » 2=R;:r J 1 i3 - s? §§ ri>o?iM2««s^icOMn»t'-viD« 8 _ _ ri A A n ^ V .- .- - . ■ - I . y X *. > 28 IS 2S; 9{ S i « ssssS'swsAni^*;:;^: ^ — *■ 3» m — . -•* — o >S .— OS a ccr*oscflOecoo»--o>oooio«iwoo»cr*t^eO ^ M OS •^ 00 «5 »0 O C^ »0 Oi iq -^l^ M i« M CO o -- lO r^ M^ od cc O »c cc ITS c- r -^ oocat-*i/3cor4t--.-'a3'T^»oc^»nco!;0'--^co;D ooot^ooo^ra-^oo-^oocc-vasaii— "Ti-^ 0ii/5i0OC^r^»-^C^^C-f00c001»CC^ oeoooooocot^oococo — <— '^r"^c^»c eo'^c*ic^ooocoos^e«3«D":ot^t— ooooosos-— « OiOiOsOOiOaasOiOOOOOOt^eOiC^'C^'-' -^ CO C^l^iO00O>l0<©0>t^00e0OOOiOiC'^r>-*0 0"— ' S" ?o tc CO c^ -^ 1-^ O 00 -^r •-'^ in O OS CO "-^ OOs05050SO>^OOOOOOt— COiCCOC^ 05ootor*t^'-<0'-''^ooc^':oio»-'»o>t^ I! »£ ^-5 o 7 < Z c 7. < X u i/i (ii »^ w z 5 < RATK OK IRRKUTION' DKVrLOPMT.NT IKl • V«4 0\ i - ' ai«* — i 3 8 tf> 9 — * — s f. -5 n — s J - I I J I « J; II 1] c If r I. fi ■ c — Z "• * s ? s I e. SI < SI > U. u. it) Z '^ 1 1 ss - .'- S 'f. ^ - -O ^fl-J — " M 1 - 3 X _ - •« ft I I « y J «i 1 i e 3E t • • •- — « I I! ^« t 182 I>IVISI()\ (»l' WATilK UKSOURCES e 9 < IS u CO < Z o u z q:; o CQ ceccci-*— — ooo^'cr. -17)^-. — r^ooo ■ • OS ^^ *— '^r^in'^^-£"^o — — ~i-t-ccQO-x>co— • ■ U) *»• 1^ — oic^j c^» cs cc oo ^r -^ rr o I'- c-i lo ^ ^^ ■ > CO ■is CM *c ■* r^ h- cc — u^ »oO OOO ■vcc — 1 I CO CM 1 CCCM CC CCCM C^ CM^ « ^ ^ ; J CM S B _ 0) •«5 U^ "o '~'=S J" ^-■^ai«c«C'^'^OcC'^'rooicr~»oo^"«»'— > ■ CM IC c r-o»c^'rrt^-r^occ'«ro-^05 — CitD'^r— > ■ « o ■^r^tc ^r-- o r- c^oi CD ^o ^ coco lo ■ ■ V CM tocM CM ^»c h-^i^ccoo cor^-^cc ^ I I CD ^1 rt CO s ci ■^t-oO(M^ooor^r^r^-^cci»c^cMio»coscM i • o O^CCiOOI^OiOO^O'T' — C^l-^'-OOOt^r^^ ' 1 io o ft> ^■^^^"^^'"1"^"'^^'"^'^'^^^'* ' ' h* CM ^^•^CM OlOO CM C30 »C C-l t^C^iO t^O »c <-^ 1 1 rf Oi ^ O <— ^OOOO t^ i:D TTCC C^ ^ ^ ■ ' S. a c P^ ^ .2 OCOOOCDOO'^CM »ft -^OOi-t Oir^iOO-^CM -^ ■ ' CM ^-tOOiC'— 't^e0004000cCCJdOaO(OQOCMOi'— ' ' ' t^ 3 ^lo o cc «i^-r (2 ^O — — OO0iCC-Xi»0'^CM^»-" , , = TP '^t* lo lo o oi oo r^ t--. «D ai h^ CO OS ro ■**" oo ^^ CM ■ • ^^ a o OSt/D aD OS COiO CO ■^-- OS'V'^ lO OCM OO-^ ' • o> M r--CM ccocM t-- ■ "5 0.2 C3 -^roTrCcM^ior^Oicct-^odr-TcMtCfo^ I ! CO a 00 r^ t^ oo 00 t'- CO ko ■>«r CO CM ^ 1-1 , , CO a> «^ CI ™ b ^- ~ in c c. •— o •r. C cscs^»o^'«*'Oc^iOiO'*eci-<*"OOOooooeo ' ■ o oo CO t* CT) oi CO OS -^ --r r* CO »o ^ o oi ic Oi »o '^ ' • o> ai cooo -^^cccc r* r--^ 10 1^ CM c-i^c^* .2 OS — CC Oodc^f^OC"? CO " t^ CO »o -^ CO -^ — , , 3 S 00 CO 1 J O ■Tf OS -^ 05 "oo:' o 2 c^rr-r-ou:J'-^coco^or^coi--^t-^-i«ooco"— -^ S OJ CTSOSOiOiOlOiOsOlosOOOOr^COU^COCM--' fe (^ fO D. ooior*QOcooor*oor*ocMOS'*j«CMiocooooo o OOt^-^OSOO^cOCMcOOCOOS^CO — C?s— 'CMtD OCMiOOOOcOCMOS^^Or^O_OCCOO^CMOS CM t^ !io »n cc cf -^ OS oc ifi" o c^j CO oi -t^" o o -^ b. ^ OSOiOSOlOlOlOlOOOOOOOOI^CO'^COCM^ eg s C^CDOOcMr^^CCOCMl-^ OlC^liOCMiOCOCO— -^fCOCD a 00c0O00l^00O»0'<»'OO- •— CM05CSOSt~*iOOS01COiOOO!^^0"^»raOSC^l ^^ C3 •-^i-^Oiuo'COCM^— 'oi^^Ioocc os^oc^ ^ OT a OSOOr*OOOOOOt--cO»C'^COCM^^^ 00 c Pm ~ J J CMOOcocDr--.cMOcoc-i»»Ot*eocMr^'0'0»flOOs OS»COeOOOOOQCOt^CO&COCO^-^'«»"«*'CO»C o ^eo-^rcMCMOooco osoieo<»'^»C'^»c ^CM 5 "9 a _Q 00 o. ^co^co^osoc'J'o<^Ococ^i"cO'^t--^eo-^ 00 (£ 2 OSOOOOOOOsOOOOt--CC'V^CMCM^« s i ; I i ; M i ; H ; : i ; i : : i ; i k ; ■^ ; a ; g ; •s • o 1: 5 tn S . ^ c J : 'i < iS > >3 ■•3 S a- S. ''=^r2?:§isg5S35SSSs'ssgss+ o H 1^ ^'^^^^.^^^Ih^i^Hi^ii^ o a a "o O Q. a o 3.2 ^ o « I O CO ec l£3 2? -o c S •o 3 c V o CJ u cd a gj c= E o rt " i c o r o tfi -o e 3 c« a O a c; S o = 2 •a "ii c 5^ c -*» a ii o c "■ £ = 2 c •=22 t Z. ^ ■[■'2. go cU < X 7 h X IJATK OK IKKICATION DKVKUU'MKNT 1h:i i K I I t < z 5 < So I I 1 = s l^-^rir-ftff^O^ .9 f 3 i J? 1 I ''I i 3 M Z /. < G i 5 sv 1 *" ' ' A ** ^ "" «S 1 9 1 t i- ' 1 if '-. - ■"- ■, ' I t : ! -5 i -c • ? a «i , o-^ riii 184 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES < u CQ < o O r* u CO O < O H O z Q O u < Q a H D a. O u z z o H < o > H O Id U H u Z CO -^ r- 00 »o r^ »o O — CTi ifs -JD — CO ^ t^ '^ • > • a oo COtMO-^^^ — CO'McC'«t"r^OO(M^QOO ' • < o> CO cscM Ti- ^»fi ---^i-^o 1- ^c^-r- oioevioo t^ * ' ' M t~ ■gi __C; iC OS ed -^ r>r h-T 3a o t>^ 00 h^ 1^ »0 c^ cct^ 1 1 I CO t-^ n '^ccr^c^icoi^^OiC'^^N — -- ^ ill tq S" B ■Z2 c2 IB o cooic4r^oot^udr^'^ifse4e4r^eocDC4eo • • ■ oocor^c^C4 Otnor^c4000>0^9r^ t i i c^ 1 • ■» « o c^co cooq t^M ■* ^^^o-^iO t^ior-^03 » • < •^ ■S'-s r^csoo o *c o -«r 00 ^^lO o cor^iosD 1 ! I ■V ►^ M rt 1^ m c; r- en o 1^ r- r^ -« i . . 00 ^fe s (J3 '^oo- o CO :D ^ Oi r^ »o ^ ci r^ "^ CO ►-» '^ , , , t-i — C^lMC^Cii— ^^^ ill o o CJ .S fc c» » i 1 Oirt(MC0Q0tr5i0-^r^0ieC)0>Oi-'C0C0C0 • ' ' to ot^r^'-'-^h-cooo0-«'^eococs«4*io<«r • » i S" 3 co_--^oq eo loooc^ ^t^csooieo c^coo^ • ' ■ CM O. ci<:c CO -^to-^r coc^t^oi" ^cDC^M oo t^ I I I •o o rt ^^ OS CO CS C^ •<*< CM CO OS C ^ fc *^ 2 a •^C0OCsO00O'*»'C0-<*''rt^I^00(M^*O • I < ** oo .^ ,— O oo -^ CD ^ 1^ C5 CJ ■*»• CO W5 »0 CO CC t^ 1 1 " 00 O00C-)'^00:='00OiOOO»O0li00lC101 < ' 1 r~ .« oa »0040t--0"*00'^iCi— ■'ITJOC'ICO'— 'TT , , , o ei CO CO -^ OS ■^ Oi -^ OS _i_ 1 t 1 ^.-•(MMcocoTr'^iou^cDOt^r^ooooT^ i i i CO 03 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t o • • ■ o icoio o »^ o»o oioo lo o w5 o«n oi i < > T C i-ii— KMCMCOeO-^-^iO^ftCCOt^l^OOOO 1 > ' < o ooo o o o oo o o o o o o oo oo ' § OI^OCMOO'^ — CMOlO-^OO-^O^OcDOO ' c ^^'^'^^'^^^^^'^'-i'^*'^'^'^'^^!'^*^ ' o eot^co -^eo cococi»-^oD »(^croooc'i"»o ^o CO I o g OOSOSCsOsCSOSOSOiOOCOI^t^iC'^CM^ , o O) OJ tlH m a. S2 ooooooooooooooooooo ' o 00 »o O c^i r^ CI CO -^ '-C ic "^ cr ^1 o «— "»?' r^ o o • > »— Oh-co^ooci-^r) — Ti^tr^vc-r-ioo • *> CD :c *n -^ CO cj o o 00 *o O CO ■'T (M 00 c-1 c; Lo r» ; C ee OiOSOiOSOsCsOOOOOOOOOt^-^iOCO*M , 3 s ^MOiOI^COCMC^(N»0000»OCO 3 CO ^oo IC -^C^'-D CO -- CM CO Ol^iO OS CSCOCOl^'-' U5 lO D. O^C■^OI'^C0-^C0OI'-'"c^l'^•^O000de0 CO CO £ '■*'-^rO'M-^»OcDI*-t'COOOOO' c 'u ^ ■a S o 2 S3 . a. « e o ^ O X O s = " fe « S ^ S 2 S 5 S B fc K S aj 3 O ■— M CO e 2.S " Mi.o C « _ 'i £ e ° I . ^CO p; o c bi-2 a-ri ..S.iS-S S = £ II -2 « C3 CJ ?? ^.2=cg§ -~ 13 O 0; u 3 4, « :>-o ig.SSn o^ S o^ c o So \nM:\i)i\ i; UATK OK IKRIf'.ATION l»»:\ HI.N IN I Al.lhORNIA. l«W».|<>;i Bm* iwrtad 1910-1914 •«•««««■ t .; \rar tfhilrt numlvn I'M*) 1410 ! 'i I lull : r. i'.i; ■•,1 IvH , I'. ebfrriak p*«n.'ai«icoU. M>|>)*». nrtUM Mid mnr toHa. PoUto proditcttoo for 1909- 191 S (or t9t}4 *«• nan ., ..»uf- i !■-? rii lU <■•••• i-nrtifHi 1 ■;. I- . »« laMn 46 to 6«k •M w»TT ■ rr.\ F.U)rMKM _ 1 , srsiiksSISSfHRiSIIIHs IS!) I ==:£8SSS3U -'•••2==2'-KB8S5U 2r2r22Si:228snr.-.'-.^. •'.««« ■8 I = = = = i^iri" ^ «r< JS »» ar. • nfm t o 1 l-'f 8 fi — i. i; — — ti f. rt r-: A -^ ^ .^ « S S 888 s < "•I if •2 1 e ^S88SSS7Z&S8?a88 is li 1 m S 51 it is c3 l|i ^45 , :^ > * ?* > ..iSi II J,4| TOO niVTSTOX OF WATER RESOT'RCES u CO < o Z o b u H 3 OS u Z o u H < u a, u H O z u en a X H (1, O ► ^ u O < u < u X H Q Z u a; H Q Z < (/i u O < u o < o O— •ccc*^OfM'^'«*oC"*'Oii'-«cr?»coc^Ci^'r*Ci a < ^ ^ O s lOCOt^t^OOOOOOOOOOOSOSOiCSOiOOO^ — 0400 i000000000:>C&0i0&9)OOO<-id0)C0 o s cr. .= 00 C3 35 iiATi; or iKiu'.AiK's iii;vi:i,oi'.\n"NT ]•>' s I •• < 1 I £22SRS8seffa i 1 1 t ^ c ^ Sua f iJ 1 m z < 3 _ - : z z X H z < 'Ji iii :S mi a, < li^ '" _'. • 192 DIVTSION OF WATER RESOURCES T3 u 3 C ON I s Z a: o b o z l-H u u 03 < H M O u > b O i w < < u H w Q Z u a: H w O < u a: u < 1 •a U ^ — « ^ CM (M C^ t coco ODOOoo o coo o <«r •g a 1 1 1 1 I t 1 p 1 I 1 1 ^«t <« CO b- 00 OS o c^ CO <«*< o 1 1 ! 1 1 ! 1 1 1 I^^cor^or-c4Mcaeot^ o 1 o -§ Gi H 1 1 1 1 1 cO-^-N,— lOOSCOtOOO^CI 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 • 1 1 CO CO CC CO CO CO Tf -^ -^ tC lO e 1— t l-> I 1 1 1 .1 -^ O -^ *- ■* 00 ■ I n-^ *-• CM c^ CI CO -or *«■ *o to « 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 • •|«-O'^CM00O ^ C&OOQQ 1 1 • 1 1 1 t 1 1 .^C^NC^CMCO-trtOtoS* til %"•% > 8 C:O^COsa>OSOSO>OS090SOSOSCAOk9AOS o2 O .. Sc. I" es = £° = . ^— o~ Is a £"5 .2 o '- « > u t^ ^ c ti-e g- o .-.^ fc- > o ^ 2 -^ « c3 O iiO CO = C o.^ S c O M ^ • rS 5 " ? 2 D. -o o g ;^>^2 -f £5,(35 O — — o3g^ S^ai E2 o A^ £ -S o a"^ Co ^, >.-^ C ~ a--3 (SO s.g. o o O c o •la 2o .. « oo o (2 I Oiicg 6*^'F a 2|fe2? CL-Ja OjU"^ « eg S S c-o ?£2Q 3 g-C-l I. (MO O ,ci OS C OS 5 RATE OK IRRIiiATION nKVKU>l'MKNT 19.1 TABLE 7B AlJtEACiiS AND TKt.NDS IN THE ACJIEAt'.liS C»F MIM H LANtCHS HtLI> t3»OPS. IS- Cll'DIS-t; Sl't.AH 111 \NS. IIAHVIMi I) IN u ..- -.-- ' Tout Y»mr IW» V" « ro rt in Ml !»tO VI %^ V !-• III J23 »4 433 374 ivt; !!' 107 t 1<. 7?^ yn) :?n sw 1913 ; . s IIS 14 u r>: lit) ■ i'< 41V 1914 : « IIS «: if> '44 . VN i'Ai S4:: I9U. IM .V. -.1 4.\t < . t «30 • 19 I9W M^ s;