UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA SERIES ON CALIFORNIA CROPS AND PRICES ALFALFA E. W. BRAUN BULLETIN 521 DECEMBER, 1931 CONTRIBUTION FROM THE GIANNINI FOUNDATION OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRINTING OFFICE BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA CONTENTS PAGE Summary 3 The general situation 6 Alfalfa production in western states compared with production in eastern states 6 Alfalfa quarantine 7 Trend of acreage and production in California 8 Utilization of alfalfa in California 10 Distribution of alfalfa production and dairy cows in California 12 Distribution of alfalfa production in California and important shifts between 1919 and 1929 12 Distribution of dairy cows in California 12 Alfalfa shipments and receipts 15 California shipments by sections 15 Alfalfa receipts at Los Angeles and San Francisco 16 Shipments of alfalfa and alfalfa meal by water to the Atlantic Coast 17 Alfalfa hay prices 21 Trend of price and price spreads between different areas in California 21 Seasonal movement of alfalfa prices in California 22 Factors affecting the price of alfalfa hay 23 Price outlook 26 Acknowledgments • 27 Appendix A: quantitative analysis of the principal factors affecting the price of alfalfa hay 28 Appendix B: basic tables 30 ALFALFA 1 E. W. BRAUN2 SUMMARY Alfalfa, the principal field crop of California, used primarily as a feed for dairy cows, is grown in practically every agricultural section of the state. In California, unlike many other sections of the United States, alfalfa production and the dairy industry are interdependent. In many dairy sections of the United States roughage feeds other than alfalfa are dominant, whereas in California alfalfa is the most important leguminous hay produced for dairy cows. At one time alfalfa hay was shipped into California in quantity from neighboring states but now alfalfa hay and meal are being shipped from California by water to the Atlantic Coast. The shipment into the state has dwindled to a negligible amount. As late as 1909 the combined tonnage of tame hay in California other than alfalfa exceeded the tonnage of alfalfa. Since that time the acreage of grain cut for hay has declined rapidly. The trend in the amount of grain cut for hay is still downward. The tonnage of alfalfa, however, has increased uniformly over a period of many years. The size of the crop exceeded 4,000,000 tons for the first time in 1927. An unusually large crop was reported for 1930. Of the total pro- duction of tame hay in the state in 1930 approximately 80 per cent was alfalfa. The total acreage devoted to alfalfa in California increased only slightly between the years 1919 and 1929. The tonnage increased more as a result of better yields than as a result of increased acreage. A comparison of county data reported in the Census reveals an important shift in the distribution of alfalfa between 1919 and 1929. In 1919 Imperial County produced only 4.0 per cent of the total alfalfa tonnage in California, whereas in 1929 this county produced 11.5 per cent of the total tonnage. An expansion of alfalfa and commercial vegetable crops has replaced cotton in Imperial County. Alfalfa is serving to a large extent as a soil-conditioning agent in rota- tion with the commercial vegetable crops. Under these conditions the hay derived tends to be in the nature of a by-product of commercial vegetable production. i Paper No. 26. The Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economies. 2 Extension Specialist in Agricultural Economics and Associate on the Giannini Foundation. 4 University of California — Experiment Station Because dairy cows are widely distributed throughout the state and because alfalfa used in supplemental feeding of beef cattle and sheep is generally locally grown, most of the alfalfa is consumed in the county in which it is grown. Shipments of alfalfa hay are, there- fore, small as compared with the size of the crop. Even though shipments are small as compared with the total volume of production they are, nevertheless, continuous throughout the year. The Los Angeles area offers a market for a large volume of commercial shipments, the 1930 receipts being about 250,000 tons. This hay comes from outlying districts, principally from the Imperial and Antelope Valleys. Receipts are heaviest during the summer months, particularly June, July, and August. During the rest of the season they are relatively uniform. A large proportion of the hay receipts at San Francisco, also heaviest in the summer months, is shipped by water to the Atlantic Coast. The volume of alfalfa hay shipped to the Atlantic Coast from California by water has varied greatly. It is likely to continue to vary in the future. In the past the year-to-year changes in prices of alfalfa at San Francisco have not corresponded to the year-to-year price changes of alfalfa in Kansas City. Regions tributary to Kansas City also ship hay to the Atlantic Coast states. The difference between hay prices at Kansas City and those at San Francisco has an important bearing upon the amount of hay that can profitably move from Cali- fornia to the Atlantic Coast. A lack of correspondence of price move- ments at San Francisco and Kansas City is likely to continue because hay prices in eastern surplus-hay markets are determined largely by supplies of clover and mixed hay. Because of its bulk, transportation charges on hay are high as compared with its value and it does not move freely enough to keep prices in line in widely separated surplus- hay areas. The price of alfalfa hay in California during the twenty years, 1910-11 to 1929-30, was established at three levels : a low level during 1910-11 to 1916-17, a high level during 1917-18 to 1920-21, and an intermediate level during 1921-22 to 1929-30. Conditions current in 1930 and 1931 suggest that a level materially lower than the one prevailing during 1921-1929 is being established. Year-to-year changes in the price of alfalfa in different parts of the state have moved together, but the average spreads between prices in different j)arts of the state have changed. Alfalfa prices are higher in the Los Angeles area than in any other part of the state because it is the principal deficit area. Recent expansion of production south Bul.521] Alfalfa 5 of the Tehachapi Mountains unaccompanied by an equally rapid development of the dairy industry is changing- this condition. As evidence of this, alfalfa hay was shipped out of Los Angeles in volume for the first time in 1930. Consequently, the spread between Los Angeles and San Francisco prices has narrowed appreciably. If supplies of hay continue to increase south of Tehachapi faster than requirements, prices at the two markets may soon be expected to average about the same for comparable grades. The spread between Imperial Valley and Los Angeles alfalfa prices has become appre- ciably narrower since 1924 as a result of decreased transportation charges. Alfalfa hay prices in California have tended to follow a distinct seasonal movement. On the average they tend to rise materially from August to January and fall materially from February to July. The general level of the yearly average price of alfalfa hay during the period, 1921-1930, was determined primarily by three factors: (1) the size of the crop, (2) the number of dairy cows, and (3) the price level of feed concentrates most commonly used in dairy rations. Changes in the first two factors are readily combined by expressing them in terms of tons per cow. On the average during the period studied, a change in the size of the crop equivalent to % ton per cow has resulted in a change of $1.00 a ton in the price of hay at Los Angeles. This relation is inverse, a decrease in price resulting from increased supplies and an increase in price resulting from decreased supplies. An increase of $1.00 a ton in the weighted average price of feed concentrates tends on the average to raise the price of hay $0.55 a ton. Likewise a decline of $1.00 a, ton in feed tends to lower the price of hay $0.55 a. ton. These relations apply to the season as a whole and not to any given month. In some years these price-influencing factors tended to operate in the same direction and in other years they tended to operate in opposite directions and thereby offset each other. The general level of the price of alfalfa for the next year or two will probably continue to be relatively low. Alfalfa tonnage is likely to be maintained or even increased as long as prices of many of the agricultural products of the state remain relatively low. Alfalfa is an attractive alternative crop because of its soil-improving qualities in addition to its market value as hay. Feed requirements for dairy cows in the near future are likely to remain low since livestock reports for 1930 indicate a decline in the number of dairy cows in 6 University of California — Experiment Station California. National and international conditions in 1931 indicate a continued low level of prices of feed concentrates. A material improvement in the price of alfalfa hay in California from that prevailing in 1930-31 may be expected from a long-time point of view in the absence of further major declines in the general level of all prices. The recent decline in the number of dairy cows is only temporary in nature ; the trend in numbers of dairy cows may be expected to be upward somewhat proportionate to increased requirements of fluid milk. Feed-lot finishing of beef cattle and sheep will doubtless continue to expand. Furthermore, prices of feed con- centrates are not likely to remain at present low levels for a long period of time. A discussion of the alfalfa situation will appear annually in the Agricultural Outlook for California. THE GENERAL SITUATION Alfalfa Production in Western States Compared with Production in Eastern States. — The United States now normally produces a total of 30,000,000 tons of alfalfa a year. The eleven western states as a group and the states east of the Rocky Mountains contribute approxi- mately equal amounts to this total. In 1921 and 1922 the total ton- nage amounted to 24,000,000 tons, of which 56 per cent was produced in the western states and only 44 per cent in the eastern states. Since that time alfalfa production in the eastern states has increased rela- tively faster than in the western states, as is shown in table 1. The two years 1924 and 1930 are out of line because the former was a severe drouth season in the West and the latter a. severe drouth season in the East. The increase in the eastern states has taken place principally in the north central states where alfalfa is fed directly to dairy cows. In this region alfalfa occupies land which would otherwise be in clover or mixed hay. In the Plains states, principally Nebraska and Kansas, the trend of alfalfa production is definitely downward. 3 This fact is of significance to the hay export phase of the California alfalfa indus- try because commercial shipments of hay move in volume from Nebraska and Kansas to the milksheds of eastern cities and compete there with California hay shipped by water to the Atlantic Coast. There has been no apparent change in alfalfa tonnage in the western states, other than California, since 1921. 3 See: Throckmorton, R. I., and S. C. Salmon. Alfalfa production in Kansas. Kansas Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 242:6. 1927. Bul,. 521] Alfalfa At one time commercial shipments moved into California in sig- nificant volume, but information giving the tonnage is not available. With the exception of Arizona, alfalfa hay cannot now be shipped into California from the mountain states because of quarantine laws maintained by California against alfalfa weevil. The movement into the state has therefore dwindled to a very small volume. Alfalfa meal from certain mills can and does enter when prices are such as to permit shipment. In recent years alfalfa hay and meal have been shipped from California to the Atlantic Coast. TABLE 1 Alfalfa Production in Western States, Eastern States, and Total United States, 1921-1930 Western states* Eastern states Total United States Per cent of total United States Year harvested Western states Eastern states 1921 1,000 tons 13,548 13,504 13,868 12,983 15,472 14,981 15,560 14,754 14,474 14,883 1,000 tons 10,157 10,930 12,122 13,803 12,967 12,594 16,263 14,381 15,373 13,704 1,000 tons 23,705 24,434 25,990 26,786 28,439 27,575 31,823 29,135 29,847 28,587 ■per cent 57.1 55.3 53.3 48.4 54 4 54.3 48.8 50.6 48.4 52.0 per cent 42.9 1922 44.7 1923 46.7 1924 51 6 1925 45.6 1926 45.7 1927 51.2 1928 49.4 1929 51.6 1930 48.0 * Western states include Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California. Sources of data: 1921-1922: Compiled from U. S. Dept. Agr. Bur. Agr. Econ. Statis. Bul. 11:26. 1925. 1923-1926: Compiled from U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture 1927:932. 1928. 1927-1929: Compiled from U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture 1930:805. 1930. 1930: Compiled from U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture 1931:805. 1931. Alfalfa Quarantine. — California established an alfalfa-weevil quarantine in August, 1912, which prohibited alfalfa hay produced in certain counties in Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming from entering Cali- fornia. 4 This quarantine was maintained and extended from time to time until at present (1931) it applies to the entire states of Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming, to most of Nevada, and to parts of Colorado, Oregon, and Nebraska. The quarantine also excludes alfalfa meal except " .. . . . from mills which are approved in writing by the Director of Agriculture as being so constructed and operated as to * California State Department of Agriculture. California Quarantine Order No. 14, August 13, 1912. 8 University of California — Experiment Station conform to adequate safeguard requirements for the prevention of alfalfa weevil infestations or contamination of the alfalfa meal." 5 CALIFORNIA ACREAGE, YIELD PER ACRE, AND PRODUCTION OF ALFALFA, 1919-1930 Fig. 1. — The production of alfalfa in California lias not fluctuated materially from year to year because of the stability of acreage and yields. The yield per acre for the state as a whole was definitely upward between 1919 and 1930. Data from table 8 Trend of Acreage and production in California? — Alfalfa is widely grown in California and ranks first in farm value among the field • r > California State Department of Agriculture. California Alfalfa Weevil Quarantine No. 7. New Series, June 20, 1930. ,; Unless otherwise specified, this section is based on data as reported by the California Cooperative Crop Reporting Service, Sacramento. See footnote on page 10. Bul. 521] Alfalfa crops of the state. The crop — over 4,000,000 tons since 1927 — is equal to about 80 per cent of the total tame-hay crop. Market fluctuations in- the price of alfalfa, therefore, affect directly and indirectly the economic well-being of a large proportion of the people of California. The acreage devoted to alfalfa in California has increased but slightly between 1919 and 1930, and the year-to-year changes have been small. Because alfalfa is an irrigated crop in California, the yield per acre likewise tends to fluctuate relatively little from year to TABLE 2 The Production of Alfalfa, Number of Dairy Cows, Milk Fat, Grain Hay, and Number of Horses and Mules in California, 1909, 1919, and 1929 < — Year Alfalfa Dairy cows Milk fat Grain hay Horses and mules* / 2 3 4 5 1909 thousand tons 1,640 2,413 2,794 thousand head 467 502 572 million lbs. 77.0 92.7 148.3 thousand tons 1,989 1,297 928 thousand head 681 1919 519 1929 316 * Includes domestic animals not on farms as well as on farms. Sources of data: Col. 1,2, 4: 1909, 1919: U. S.Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census, 1920. vol. VI, part 3. pp.338 and 341. 1929: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census. California Census Report for 1930. pp. 20 and 26. See also footnote 9, page 10. Col. 3: 1909, 1919: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census, 1925. vol. VII, p. 3, table 2. Figures are for total production including estimates for incomplete reports. Milk fat in total whole milk production was computed by multiplying gallons of whole milk by 0.3354, the average number of pounds of milk fat in one gallon of milk. 1929: California State Dept. Agr. Statistical report of California dairy products. Special Publ. 99:10. 1929. Col. 5: 1909, 1919: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census, 1920. vol. VI, part 3. pp. 338 and 339. 1929: California Cooperative Crop Reporting Service Annual Report, January 23, 1930, Sacra- mento. year. The yearly variation in the size of the alfalfa crop tends, therefore, to be less than that of most other field crops. From 1919 to 1930 alfalfa production has increased more as a result of increased yields than as a result of increased acreage. California alfalfa acreage, yield per acre, and production from 1919 to 1930 are shown graphi- cally in figure 1. The acreage devoted to alfalfa in California averaged 923,000 acres for the three years 1919-1921, and 1,003,300 for the three years 1928-1930. The increase of 80,000 acres during this period was in the nature of a gradual upward trend interrupted only slightly in 1924 and again in 1929. The total tonnage increased from an average of 3,400,000 tons for the three years 1919-1921, to an average of 4,256,000 tons during 1928-1930. Of this 856,000 ton increase, only 30 per cent is due to 10 University of California — Experiment Station increased acreage. The other 70 per cent, equivalent to 600,000 tons, is due to an increase in the average yield per acre. The yield per acre increased from an average of 3.68 tons for 1919-1921 to -an average of 4.33 tons for 1928-1930 for the state as a whole. 7 Utilization of Alfalfa in California. — Alfalfa either in the form of hay or as green feed is used primarily as a feed for dairy cows. It is one of the best roughage feeds available for milk-producing rations. 8 Crop and livestock reports show that expansion of alfalfa production in the state has been accompanied by a great development in the dairy industry; whereas the decline in the number of horses and mules has been accompanied by an approximately proportionate decline in the tonnage of grain cut for hay. Table 2, based on census reports, 9 shows briefly in quantitative terms what the trend has been during the twenty-year period, 1909-1929. Alfalfa production in- creased from 1,640,000 tons to 2,794,000 tons, an increase of 91 per cent. The number of dairy cows increased from 467,000 to 572,000, an increase of 22 per cent, but the production of milk fat increased from 77,000,000 pounds to 148,300,000 pounds, or 93 per cent. There has been a decline of 54 per cent in the number of horses and mules. The tonnage of grain hay has decreased 57 per cent. In Mendocino, Humboldt, and Del Norte counties, although pri- marily a dairy section, alfalfa is little used because grazing is prac- ticed the entire year, supplemented by feed concentrates. Alfalfa is commonly fed to beef cattle and sheep when grazing needs to be supplemented. The extent to which supplemental feeding must be practiced is determined by the supply and quality of the natural forage, which is dependent largely upon the amount of rain- fall and its distribution. The supply of natural grass is dependent 7 For a discussion of the factors affecting the yield per acre the reader is referred to: Madson, B. A. Alfalfa production. California Agr. Ext. Cir. 35:7. 1929. s For a complete treatment of this subject see: Henry, W. A., and F. B. Morrison. Feeds and feeding, p. 376-379. The Henry-Morrison Company, Madi- son, Wisconsin. 1923 edition. 9 Alfalfa acreages and tonnages for 1919 and 1929, as reported by the Census, are considerably under those reported by the California Cooperative Crop Ee- porting Service. A report of the Imperial County Irrigation District records 170,000 acres in alfalfa as of February 15, 1929, and the Census reports 112,432 acres, a difference of 57,568 acres. The report of the irrigation district is no doubt the more accurate. The discrepancy arises in part from the fact that census enumerators do not get a perfectly complete tabulation and because undoubtedly much alfalfa that is cut green or pastured is not entered in the alfalfa hay category. It may be assumed that in terms of percentages the understatement by the Census is not much different in one census period from that in any other. Increases and decreases, therefore, may be used with greater confidence than the total figures. Bul. 521] Alfalfa 11 principally upon the amount of rainfall. The quality of the dry grass for summer grazing is determined principally by the degree of leaching caused by rainfall after the grass reaches maturity. 10 Siski- you, Modoc, Lassen, and Shasta counties generally produce enough alfalfa, together with other forage crops, to fulfill feeding require- ments. Along the coast from Mendocino county southward and in the foothill section of the Sierras some supplemental feeding is ordi- narily necessary from the first of October to some time in February. Alfalfa, grain hay, native grass hay, and cottonseed are the most common feeds used for this purpose. Sheep men in the early lamb section use alfalfa to keep their ewes in good condition until natural grass is available in quantity. The heaviest feeding for this purpose occurs during November, December, and January. Finishing beef cattle and lambs in feed lots is also becoming a common practice. The amount of alfalfa used varies, but in practi- cally all cases alfalfa is an important part of the ration. In mid- summer 1931 it was estimated that approximately 35,000 beef cattle, and 150,000 sheep were under feed-lot management. In Imperial Valley, in contrast with the practice in other sections of the state, many thousand head of beef cattle and sheep are grazed on alfalfa and grain pasture. The rabbit and poultry industries, as well as the citrus industry, also use alfalfa hay in significant volume, although it amounts to only a very small percentage of the total. The rabbit producers offer a premium market for the choicest grades of hay. Poultrymen use alfalfa in the form of meal in their mash feeds. Citrus growers use it primarily to supply organic matter to the soil, for which purpose alfalfa hay serves very well and competes directly with manure and bean straw. The fertilizer outlet for alfalfa expands readily when the price of hay is relatively low or when the price of oranges is relatively high. In some areas of the state, particularly in Imperial County, alfalfa is used in rotation with commercial vegetable production as a soil- conditioning agent. Should this practice become very widespread in the future it will tend to place the level of hay prices lower than it would be otherwise because under such conditions the hay crop is in the nature of a by-product, in this case a by-product of commercial vegetable production. io Guilbert, H. E., S. W. Mead, and H. C. Jackson. The effect of leaching on the nutritive value of forage plants. Hilgardia 6:13-26. 1931. 12 University of California — Experiment Station DISTRIBUTION OF ALFALFA PRODUCTION AND DAIRY COWS IN CALIFORNIA Distribution of Alfalfa Production in California and Important Shifts Between 1919 and 1929. — Alfalfa is produced in practically every agricultural section of the state. The principal alfalfa-produc- ing areas of the state in order of their importance are: the San Joaquin Valley, southern counties (south of the Tehachapi Moun- tains), and the Sacramento Valley. Figure 2 shows the approximate distribution of alfalfa hay in the state in 1929 based on the 1930 census. In 1929 eight San Joaquin Valley counties had 44 per cent of the acreage and 48 per cent of the tonnage; seven southern counties had 25 per cent of the acreage and 25 per cent of the tonnage ; ten Sacramento Valley counties had 11 per cent of the acreage and 12 per cent of the tonnage ; and all other counties had 21 per cent of the acreage, but only 15 per cent of the tonnage because of a lower yield per acre than that prevailing in the principal producing centers. A phenomenal expansion of alfalfa acreage took place in Imperial County between 1919 and 1929. The 1930 census indicates that alfalfa acreage in that county increased 64,000 acres during the ten years. In 1919 Imperial County had 7.0 per cent of the acreage and 4.0 per cent of the alfalfa tonnage in the state ; by 1929 it had 14.0 per cent of the total acreage and 11.5 per cent of the total tonnage. This great ex- pansion in Imperial County is due in large measure to the fact that alfalfa serves to improve the soil when planted in rotation with vege- table crops. Alfalfa and commercial vegetable crops have replaced acreage which was formerly in cotton. Alfalfa acreage in the Antelope Valley increased from about 5,400 acres in 1920 to approximately 20,000 or 25,000 acres in 1929. The only other important shift that took place during the decade was a decrease in Tulare, Merced, and Fresno counties. In 1919 Tulare produced 11.5 per cent of the total tonnage of the state, Merced 9.7 per cent, and Fresno 10.6. The percentages for 1929 are Tulare 7.6, Merced 7.6, and Fresno 7.0. Distribution of Dairy Cows in California. — With the exception of Los Angeles County, San Francisco Bay counties, and Humboldt County, the distribution of dairy cows in California closely approxi- mates the distribution of alfalfa production, as may be noted from a comparison of figures 2 and 3. For this reason most of the alfalfa Bul, 521] Alfalfa 13 produced in California is fed in the county where it is grown. Hay fed to beef cattle and sheep is also usually grown in the district in which it is fed. Commercial shipments, therefore, are small as com- PRODUCTION OF ALFALFA HAY IN CALIFORNIA, 1930 CENSUS DOT - 5000 TONS Fig. 2. — Alfalfa is grown in practically every agricultural section of the state. ^ Data from table 19 pared to the total tonnage produced. The concentration of cows near Los Angeles arises from the feed-lot dairying practiced in that area, to supply milk for the Los Angeles fluid-milk market. Likewise the concentration of cows near San Francisco Bay is due to the fluid-milk 14 University of California — Experiment Station markets which San Francisco and East Bay cities offer. The San Francisco milkshed, however, depends to a lesser degree on alfalfa than does the Los Angeles milkshed because pasturage is more abun- DISTRIBUTION OF DAIRY COWS IN CALIFORNIA, 1930 CENSUS \ \> \^/ '•::[ • *•• \r ^C*» * *•* '-i 1 "**•" IOOO cows % . , ^V • v-J •# • ;. Fig. 3. — Except for coast counties the distribution of dairy cows in Cali- fornia closely approximates the distribution of alfalfa production. Data from table 19 dant in the sections which supply San Francisco with fluid milk. There is also an abundance of pasture in the northern coast counties of Humboldt and Del Norte. Bul. 521] Al.FAL.FA 15 The extent to which shifts in both alfalfa and dairying took place between 1919 and 1929 is summarized in table 3, in which the per- centage of the total that is in each case attributed to the different sec- tions is tabulated. In reviewing- this table it should be borne in mind that alfalfa increased in Imperial and Antelope valleys and that the number of dairy cows increased near Los Angeles. Information for specific counties is given in table 19 of Appendix B. TABLE 3 Distribution of Alfalfa and Dairy Cows in California by Sections, 1919 and 1929 Alfalfa tonnage Dairy cows Section 1919 1929 1919 1929 per cent 56 16 12 16 per cent 48 25 12 15 per cent 36 14 11 39 per cent 37 18 Ten Sacramento Valley counties. 9 36 Total 100 100 100 100 Sources of data: 1919: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census. 1920. 1929: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census. 1930, preliminary release. (Mimeo.) For specific counties see Appendix B, table 19. ALFALFA SHIPMENTS AND RECEIPTS California Shipments by Sections. — Alfalfa shipments, though small as compared to the total production, are nevertheless of sizable volume and are continuous throughout the year. The feed-lot dairying near Los Angeles offers the greatest stimulus to the shipping of alfalfa from the outlying producing sections, such as Imperial Valley, Antelope Valley, and certain sections in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles counties. San Francisco offers a market for com- mercial shipments from the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. A large proportion of the hay shipped to San Francisco goes by water to the Atlantic seaboard. Commercial shipments of alfalfa hay come principally from Ante- lope Valley and from Imperial Valley. During the 1930-31 season these two valleys shipped approximately an equal volume. About 108,000 tons were shipped from Antelope Valley and 104,000 tons from Imperial Valley. The Riverside Alfalfa Association shipped 21,000 tons, originating principally in the Hemet district. 16 University of California — Experiment Station Imperial Valley ships new-crop hay in heavy volume earlier in the year than other sections. Figure 4 shows the monthly distribution of shipments for the 1930-31 season of Imperial and Antelope valleys and a four-year average, 1927-28 to 1930-31, of the shipments of the Riverside Alfalfa Association. Information on seasonal sales in the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys is not at hand. * SEASONAL SHIPMENTS OF ALFALFA HAY FROM DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE STATE 14 12 10 8 6h i Lji AVERA GE 192 7-28 T 1930- 31 m \ \ / \ \ II \ \ 4 / \ \ r 7 \ 1 1 \ r V • • / \ v 1 • / • / 1 1 N / / I ANTELOPE \ • / - 1 / * / */ l93< )-3l IMPERIAL 1930-31 -■"N »• — < »— -rs ^^ - / « ^V ► ( / t V > a. >- z _l O Q. 1- > o z co Q. < D D D Id U o 111 < Ul < 2 -> -> < (/> o z Q -) u. ae < Fig. 4. — The heaviest shipments occur during the summer months, May to September. The Imperial Valley shipping season is earlier than that of other important shipping sections. In 1930-31 Antelope Valley shipped 108,000 tons, Imperial Valley 104,000 tons, and the Riverside Alfalfa Association 21,000 tons. Data from table 9 Alfalfa Receipts at Los Angeles and San Francisco. — Total re- ceipts of alfalfa hay in the Los Angeles market area amounted to about 250,000 tons during the twelve months, April, 1930, to March, 1931. J1 A period of five summer months, May-September, is the season of heaviest receipts, as may be noted from figure 5. Slightly over 50 per cent of the total receipts occurred during these five months. The other 50 per cent of the receipts were distributed rather uniformly throughout the other seven months. February receipts are apparently low because it is a short month. ii Reliable information on receipts at Los Angeles is not available for seasons prior to 1930-31 because the Federal-State Market News Service was not established until September, 1929. Bul. 521] Alfalfa 17 Information on receipts of hay at San Francisco includes grain hay which, according to people in the trade, has in some years consti- tuted from 30 to 40 per cent of the total receipts. Total hay receipts at San Francisco, like those at Los Angeles, though much less in total volume, are also distributed throughout the year. Receipts at San Francisco average 43,600 tons annually during the five years, 1926-27 SEASONAL EECEIPTS OF ALFALFA HAY AT LOS ANGELES AND ALL HAY AT SAN FEANCISCO 16 I- I 12 < r — \ \ SAN FRANCISCO \ /AVERAGE 1926-27 TO 1930-31 V Fig. 5. — At San Francisco a greater per cent of the total receipts of a season occur in the summer months than is the case at Los Angeles. In terms of tons receipts at Los Angeles are much greater than at San Francisco. In 1930-31 receipts at Los Angeles amounted to 250,000 tons and at San Francisco 57,000 tons which included receipts of grain hay. Data from table 10 to 1930-31. During this five-year period 58 per cent of the average seasonal receipts came during the five summer months, May-Sep- tember, and 42 per cent were distributed throughout the other seven months. While the alfalfa received at San Francisco in terms of total ton- nage may not be important from the standpoint of the alfalfa indus- try, it serves as an indicator of the extent of selling activity taking place inland. Shipments of Alfalfa and Alfalfa Meal by Water to the Atlantic Coast. — Some alfalfa hay and alfalfa meal are shipped from Cali- fornia to the Atlantic seaboard; the combined tonnage of both is 18 University of California — Experiment Station however, very small as compared to the size of the crop. In 1930 when shipments to the Atlantic Coast were heavier than those of any other recent year, the combined tonnage of hay and meal, amounting to 33,000 tons, was less than 1 per cent of the total production. Water- borne shipments of meal have, however, increased materially in volume since 1924, as may be noted from table 4. There are two important reasons for the wide fluctuations in hay shipments to eastern markets. First, California alfalfa-hay prices are in large measure independent of alfalfa-hay prices in eastern surplus- TABLE 4 Water-Borne Shipments of Hay and Alfalfa Meal from California to the Atlantic Seaboard, 1924-1930 Year Hay * Alfalfa meal 1924 tons 45 3,800 12,000 tons 180 1925 1926 635 1,790 1927 2,680 8,880 1928 2,740 1,844 20,790 1929 8,546 1930 12,956 * Includes grain hay. Sources of data: 1924-1928: Special report to the writer from the United States Shipping Board. B. R. No. 1903, May 22, 1931. 1929-1930: Federal-State Market News Service, San Francisco office. (Includes quantity reported by U. S. Shipping Board for Los Angeles.) hay markets. Hay prices in these eastern markets are largely deter- mined by the supplies of clover and mixed hay, which are the dominant types of hay there. Alfalfa, on the other hand, is the domi- nant type of hay in California. Secondly, transportation charges on hay per unit are high in relation to its value. The maximum rate to the Atlantic seaboard during the past ten years was $12.00 a ton and the minimum, $8.00 a ton, current in May, 1931. The rates on meal ranged between $9.00 and $6.00 a ton, the latter also being current in May, 1931. Because of its bulk, hay is considered distress cargo by intercoastal water carriers and a commodity in this class is carried only when goods of a higher revenue rate cannot be secured. In consequence, hay does riot move freely enough in sufficient volume to keep prices of com- parable grades in line in widely separated surplus-hay areas. Bul,. 521 Alfalfa 19 The degree of independence of the movement of alfalfa prices at Kansas City and San Francisco may be noted from figure 6. Since 1910, the change from one year to the next in the average yearly prices at the two markets has often been in opposite directions or in different amounts when in the same direction. This has an important bearing upon the amount of hay that can .move profitably from Cali- fornia to the Atlantic Coast because regions tributary to Kansas City also ship hay to the Atlantic Coast states. From 1928 to 1929 the price dropped at Kansas City and moved upward at San Francisco. PRICE OF ALFALFA HAY AT SAN FKANCISCO AND KANSAS CITY, 1910-1930 35 30 §2 S 2 Q. 2 ii < O 10 o - r"\ - KANSAS CITY)*' \ ^ J 1 *-+s SCO * > '^— —r* S • KA NSAS C ITY-' - 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1926 1929 CROP YEAR (BEGINNING IN YEAR GIVEN) 1930 1931 Fig. 7. — Since 1921 the price of alfalfa meal at Kansas City lias tended toward higher levels. There has been no similar trend in the price of meal at San Fran- cisco. The price at San Francisco became relatively lower and as a result shipments of alfalfa meal to the Atlantic Coast increased materially. Data from table 17 The trend of meal prices at Kansas City has been upward ; whereas the price at San Francisco has shown no definite trend between 1921 and 1930. For this reason buyers on the Atlantic Coast have in recent years often found it possible to buy alfalfa meal as cheaply from San Francisco as from Kansas City, and as a consequence, meal shipments from San Francisco to the Atlantic Coast have increased materially since 1924. The volume of meal shipments in the future will depend largely upon the price of meal at San Francisco as compared with that at Kansas City. This applies as well to the trend of shipments as it does to the year-to-year variations. Bul. 521 Alfalfa 21 ALFALFA HAY PRICES Trend of Price and Price Spreads Between Different Areas in California. — The price of alfalfa hay in California during the twenty years, 1910-11 to 1929-30, was established at three levels: a low level prevailing during 1910-11 to 1916-17, a high level during 1917-18 to 1920-21, and an intermediate level during 1921-22 to 1929-30. Con- ditions current in 1930 and 1931 suggest that a level materially lower than the one prevailing during 1921-1929 is being established. Long- time averages and the extent of the changes are given in table 5 for different areas in California, TABLE 5 Average Price Levels of Alfalfa Hay at Certain California Points by Periods in Dollars Per Ton, 1910-1930 Crop years, April-March Modoc and Siskiyou San Joaquin Valley* San Francisco Los Angeles Imperial Valley 1 2 3 4 6 1910-11 to 1916-17 1917-18 to 1920-21 dollars 10.10 7.00 dollars 9.65 18.75 15 95 15.95 10 70 dollars 10.75 21.60 17.45 18.40 14.50 dollars 15 00| 25.90 22.60 22.20 16.45 dollars 1921-22 to 1925-26 1926-27 to 1929-30 14.50 15.00 1930-31 12.75 * Modesto. f Two years only. Source of data: Compiled from table 11. Alfalfa prices are higher at Los Angeles than in any other part of the state because it is a terminal market in a deficit area. Very low prices prevail in the extreme northern counties. Price levels in other sections of the state vary between these two extremes. The difference between the Los Angeles price and the San Francisco price has become appreciably less in recent years than in former years. During 1921- 1925 Los Angeles prices averaged $4.15 a ton above those at San Fran- cisco ; during 1926-1929 the difference narrowed to $3.80 a ton ; and for the 1930-31 season the average difference closely approximated $2.00 a ton. If the counties south of the Tehachapi Mountains continue to increase alfalfa production faster than the market requirements for those counties, then the price of alfalfa hay may be expected to average about the same at Los Angeles and San Francisco for com- parable grades. 22 University of California — Experiment Station On the average, prices in the San Joaquin Valley during the twenty-one years, 1910-1930, were $6.00 a ton under those prevailing in the Los Angeles area. This spread, as may be noted from figure 8, has remained rather uniform over the entire period. The difference between Imperial Valley prices and Los Angeles prices has been materially reduced between 1921 and 1930 chiefly as a result of a reduction in transportation charges. During 1921-1925, Imperial Valley prices averaged $8.00 a ton under Los Angeles PRICE OF ALFALFA HAY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AND IN THE LOS ANGELES AREA IN DOLLARS PER TON, 1910-1930 I9IO 1915 1920 1925 CROP YEAR (BEGINNING IN YEAR GIVEN) 1930 Fig. 8. — Price movements of alfalfa hay in the San Joaquin Valley have corresponded very closely to price movements in the Los Angeles area. The price spread has been relatively uniform, averaging $6.00 a ton during 1912-1930. Data from table 11 prices, whereas the price for the 1930 season averaged less than $4.00 nnder those at Los Angeles. Commercial shipments of hay from Imperial Valley, therefore, enjoy a price advantage which they did not formerly possess. The year-to-year changes of alfalfa prices in different parts of California move together. The correspondence of the movement of San Joaquin prices with prices at Los Angeles is illustrated in figure 8. A similar correspondence exists between other points; these are given in detail in table 11 of Appendix B. Seasonal Movement of Alfalfa Prices in California. — To illustrate seasonal fluctuation, Los Angeles alfalfa-hay prices have been selected as the best available source of data for presenting the situation throughout the state. These prices have tended to follow a distinct Bul. 521] ALFALFA 23 seasonal variation. During the season prices tend to fall materially from February to July and August and rise materially from August to January. Over a period of years prices in July and August have tended to be 10 per cent below the seasonal average and January and February prices have tended to be about 10 per cent above the seasonal average, as is shown in figure 9. It will be noted that the seasonal movement of prices has been almost directly opposite to the seasonal distribution of shipments with the exception of February ALFALFA HAY: SEASONAL PRICE AT LOS ANGELES AND SEASONAL SHIPMENTS FROM RIVERSIDE uj M0 o E a. U o < 100 Ql UJ 5 H 90 z Ul O 80 < t / c— - > \ \ \ i / \ ^/average PRICE^ i « v r LOS ANGELES^ X- / V r s '■•■*' > M ^ \ \ \ 1 r \ t "> ^ *^ ► N AVERAGE SHIPMENTS ) V RIVERSIDE y > i 19 27-2 8 TOI 930-3 1 10 Fig. 9. — During recent years the price of alfalfa hay at Los Angeles has followed a rather distinct seasonal movement, almost directly opposite to an index of commercial shipments from Riverside which reflects selling activity. The early spring months are exceptions largely because of the prevalence of green feed at that time. The price in the San Joaquin Valley shows a similar seasonal movement. Data from tables 9 and 14 and March. In these two months hay prices tend to weaken because an abundance of green feed is generally available at that time. Factors Affecting the Price of Alfalfa Hay. — The general level of yearly average prices of alfalfa hay in California have, during 1921- 1930, been determined primarily by three factors: (1) the size of the crop, (2) the number of dairy cows, and (3) the price level of feed concentrates most commonly used in dairy rations. There are, of course, other factors that influence the price of alfalfa hay, but they were of relatively minor importance during the period here studied. The first two factors mentioned, namely, the size of the crop and the 24 University of California — Experiment Station number of dairy cows, can be readily combined by expressing" the crop in terms of tons per dairy cow. An analysis of the data for 1921-1930 inclusive, shows that on the average an increase in the size of the crop equivalent to % ton per cow tended to decrease the price of alfalfa $1.00 a ton in the Los Angeles area. 12 Conversely, a decrease in size of the crop equal to x /i ton per cow tended to increase the price of alfalfa hay to* the extent of $1.00 per ton. WEIGHTED AVERAGE PRICE OF FEED CONCENTRATES COMMONLY USED IN DAIRY RATIONS IN DOLLARS PER TON, 1921-1930 1 50 1 FEED CONCENTRATES Z 45 O o:40 a (0 35 a. < _i ^30 a 25 - 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 Fig. 10. — The price of feed concentrates commonly used in dairy rations has an important bearing- upon the price of alfalfa hay. The price here shown is a weighted average price at San Francisco of ground barley, bran, beet pulp, cottonseed, linseed, cracked corn, and rolled oats. Data from table 18 In connection with the price influence arising from feed concen- trates the relation is positive. An increase of $1.00 a ton in the price of concentrate feeds resulted in an increase of $0.55 a ton in the price of hay. The reverse is true in the case of a decline in the price of feed concentrates. The price relations established by this study are based upon the manner in which they operated during the period, 1921-1930. The degree to which the annual average market prices may be accounted for by the established relations is calculated in table 6 (Appendix A) for each of the ten years. The price level of feed concentrates is an important factor and needs to be taken into account in connection with estimates as to probable future price levels of alfalfa hay. The average price of feed concentrates used in this study is a composite of seven feeds : ground barley, bran, cracked corn, rolled oats, beet pulp, cottonseed meal, 12 A detailed discussion of the methods used in obtaining this result and those following are found in Appendix A. Buu 521] Alfalfa 25 and linseed meal, weighted according to their relative importance in the dairy ration. It will be noted from figure 10 that the average of feed prices fluctuates considerably and, therefore, cannot be esti- mated very far in advance with a high degree of accuracy. It should be remembered that the price-determining factors do not always exert their influence in the same direction. Also, the relations as given in this study do not hold for a given month. They apply to the season as a whole. When the supply of hay is short and feed prices are high, the price of alfalfa hay is forced very high. The 1924 situation serves to illustrate a year of that type. When the major factors operate in opposite directions they tend to offset each other and no material change in the price of hay takes place. This was the case in 1926 when the supply of alfalfa was short. The price-raising influence of the short crop was more than offset by the price-depress- ing influence occasioned by a drop in the price of feed concentrates. The price of milk fat has a more direct influence upon the price of feed concentrates than upon the price of alfalfa hay. Milk fat production expands and contracts much more nearly in proportion to the amount of feed concentrates fed than to the quantity of hay fed. It is the price of feed concentrates that affects directly the price of alfalfa hay. The only manner in which a change in the price of milk fat can affect the price of alfalfa hay over a period of several months is by changing the amount of hay fed to dairy cows. A major drop in the price of milk fat tends for a time to check the rate at which dairymen as a group take hay off the market, as many are then in a position to buy for current needs only. This would tend to lower the price of hay for a short time but the drop would be temporary if in the meantime the price of feed concentrates did not drop also, and the number of dairy cows was not reduced. In the absence of a major change in the supply of hay, the price of hay follows changes in the price of feed concentrates. If the price of concentrates goes down as compared with the price of hay, dairy- men feed more concentrates and less hay, which causes a drop in the price of hay. If, however, the price of concentrates goes up as com- pared with that of hay, dairymen economize on concentrates and feed more hay, thereby raising the price of hay. The 1924 and 1930 seasons are outstanding examples of major changes in the prices of milk fat, feed concentrates, and alfalfa in California. In 1924 the price of butter dropped to a level as low as in 1921 and yet the price of alfalfa in 1924 was higher than in any other year since 1920. The price of hay was higher than appeared warranted from the supply 26 University of California — Experiment Station of alfalfa per cow. There was a reduction in the number of cows in that year because of the slaughter occasioned by the foot-and-mouth disease. A change in the number of cows is taken into account in the study by expressing alfalfa tonnage in terms of tons per cow. The price of hay rose in spite of the drop in the price of butter because dairymen as a class tended to economize on the very high-priced feed concentrates, and in trying to offset it by feeding more alfalfa hay they initiated an active market for hay. The active market for hay was also stimulated by short pasture conditions for beef cattle and sheep. In 1930 the returns per pound of milk fat were again at relatively low levels. During that season the price of alfalfa hay also went to very low levels in all parts of the state, but not as a direct result of the drop in the average price for milk fat. It was in part due to a large crop of alfalfa and a reduction in the number of dairy cows, but the price of hay went much lower than was apparently warranted by supplies of hay per cow. It did so because prices of feed concen- trates had fallen and were cheap as compared with hay. As a result dairymen tended to economize on hay, and that forced the price of hay to levels lower than would otherwise have prevailed. The factors affecting butter prices and prices of the principal feed concentrates are national and international in scope. Conditions in California can affect these factors only in a very slight degree. A change in fluid-milk requirements in California does, however, affect the return per pound of milk fat of many dairymen in the state because the fluid-milk market yields higher returns per pound of milk fat than does the butter market. Price Outlook. — The general level of the price of alfalfa hay for a number of years to come may be expected to average lower than the level which prevailed from 1921 to 1929. This conclusion is based upon the probable future developments in alfalfa acreage in Cali- fornia, the probable trend in number of dairy cows in California, and the probable future level of the price of feed concentrates. The acreage devoted to alfalfa in California is not likely to decrease so long as prices of many of the principal agricultural products of the state remain relatively low. Land devoted to enterprises which are unprofitable tends to be put into alfalfa because of its soil-improving qualities. On the other hand, increasing difficulty in obtaining irri- gation water is tending in certain sections to bring about a decrease in alfalfa acreage. A definite reduction in the number of dairy cows in California occurred in 1930 and it is the opinion of people familiar with the dairy industry that a further decrease is taking place Bul. 521] Alfalfa 27 in 1931. A material increase in the number of dairy cows in Cali- fornia is not to be expected until the dairy industry in this state is stimulated by an increased demand for fluid milk. It is impossible to determine at this time the probable future level of the price of feed concentrates with any degree of accuracy. However, conditions current in 1931 do not suggest any likelihood that feed prices will move upward to levels comparable with those of 1927-1929 for several years to come. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to the following persons and organizations that have generously contributed from their data and their time in the preparation of this study : California Cooperative Crop Reporting Service; Federal-State Market News Service; Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture ; Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United States Department of Commerce ; Division of Agricultural Economics, University of California; Riverside Alfalfa Association; San Francisco Chamber of Commerce ; Los Angeles Grain Exchange ; and particularly Dr. H. R. Wellman and Mr. G. E. Gordon, fellow associates, for their personal counsel and interest, 28 University of California — Experiment Station APPENDIX A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE PRICE OF ALFALFA HAY The charts in figure 11 show the procedure followed in this, study in measuring" the nature of the influence of the principal factors affecting the price of alfalfa hay. In chart A the average price per ton of alfalfa at Los Angeles is plotted coordinately, with the size of the crop expressed in terms of tons per cow. For example, $18.54, the average price for 1921, is plotted at 6.44 tons, the point being ALFALFA PRICE-DETERMINING FACTORS AT LOS ANGELES DURING 1921-1930 26 z 224 .<* E 22 _i or << 20 24 • A p _23 ^•29 20 »5 22 ► 26« 27. • 21 S 30< i + 2 9 o o-2 < U -4 O CD B .. P Z *s^ ^24 29« 28*^ s • ?» 2.Sy/ •22 30«/^ >^2I» F ' 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 TONS OF ALFALFA PER COW 35 50 FEED CONCENTRATES DOLLARS PER TON Fig. 11. — The price of alfalfa hay is inversely related to the size of the crop and directly related to the price of feed concentrates. An increase in the size of the crop equal to *4 ton per cow tends to cause a decrease of $1.00 a ton in the price of alfalfa hay. A decrease in the size of the crop equal to *4 ton per cow tends to cause an increase of $1.00 a ton in the price of alfalfa. An increase of $1.00 a ton in the price of concentrate feeds results in an increase of $0.55 a ton in the price of hay. designated as 21. The data applying to each of the ten years are charted in this manner. The ten points scattered over the chart indi- cate a line PS as representing the average relation of supply to price. In certain years the price is above the line PS and in certain years below the line. The price deviations above and below the line PS are then related in chart B to the price of feed concentrates. Again using 1921 to illustrate, the price deviation below the line PS, amount- ing to $4.16 per ton, is plotted coordinate with $34.14, which was the average price of feed concentrates in that year. Each point in chart Bul. 521] Alfalfa 29 B is plotted in a like manner. The fact that the points fall reasonably well in line is evidence that the price of feed concentrates explains practically all of the price unaccounted for by the supply of hay and number of dairy cows. The position of the line PF is established by inspection. The slope of the line PS is minus $1.00 a ton for each Vi ton per cow, and the slope of line PF is plus $0.55 a ton for each dollar per ton in the price of feeds. The two lines may now be used to calculate an estimated price. Illustrating again with 1921, in chart A, at 6.44 tons per cow the line PS indicates a price of $22.70 per ton. The price of feed concentrates TABLE 6 Difference Between Price Estimated on Basis of Alfalfa Price Study and Average Market Price in Dollars per Ton at Los Angeles, 1921-1930 Year Unadjusted price esti- mated from tons of alfalfa per cow Adjustment for price of feed concentrates Estimated price for Los Angeles Average market price at Los Angeles Error of estimate / 2 3 A 5 1921 dollars 22.70 22 90 23.10 23.40 20.70 22.10 20.70 21.10 21.80 19.60 dollars -3.00 +0.30 +1 10 +3.50 +1.50 -1.00 +1.30 +1.60 +0.20 -3.90 dollars 19 70 23.20 24.20 26.90 22.20 21 10 22.00 22.70 22.00 15.70 dollars 18.54 21.75 23.70 26.25 22.65 21.70 21.65 2300 22.35 16.43 dollars -1.16 1922 -1 -0 -0 +0 +0 -0 +0 +0 +0 45 1923 50 1924 65 1925 45 1926 1927 60 35 1928 30 1929 .. 35 1930 73 Sources of data : Col. 1 : Read from line P S of figure 11 A. Col. 2: Read from line P F of figure 11 B. Col. 3: Col. 1 plus col. 2. Col. 4: From table 11. Col. 5: Col. 3 subtracted from col. 4. in that year was $34.14, at which point in chart B, the line PF indi- cates -$3.00. The estimated price is $19.70, that is, $22.70 minus $3.00. The actual price was $18.54; therefore the estimate is in error $1.16 a ton as shown in column 5 of table 6. An estimated price for each of the ten years reveals a rather general underestimate from 1921 to 1924 and a rather general over- estimate since then. This indicates a slight upward trend in the demand for alfalfa hay. 30 University of California — Experiment Station APPENDIX B BASIC TABLES TABLE 7 Data Used as Basis of Analysis of the Principal Factors Determining the Price of Alfalfa Hay in California During 1921-22 to 1931-32 Crop year Number of dairy cows, January 1 Estimated number of cows, June 1 Alfalfa production Tons per cow Price of feed concentrates Price of alfalfa hay, Los Angeles area 1 2 3 4 5 6 1921-22 1,000 head 530 550 580 J595 \570* 579 596 596 614 626 626 613 1,000 head 540 565 587 575 587 596 605 620 626 620 1,000 tons 3,482 3,618 3,728 3,615 4,078 3,924 4,204 4,246 4,175 4,630 tons 6.44 6.40 6.35 6.27 6.94 6.58 6.94 6.84 6.66 7.17f dollars per ton 34.14 40.43 41.60 46.08 42.41 37.98 42.09 42.66 40.02 31.69 dollars per ton 18.54 1922-23 21.75 1923-24 23.70 1924-25 26.25 1925-26 22.65 1926-27 21.70 1927-28 21.65 1928-29 23.00 1929-30 22.35 1930-31 16.43 1931-32 * 25,044 dairy cows slaughtered because of foot-and-mouth diseaee early in 1924. See: Keane, Charles. The epizootic of foot-and-mouth disease. California State Dept. Agr., Special Publ. 65:54. 1925. t Based on unrevised estimate of alfalfa production and number of dairy cows. Final estimates of alfalfa production and number of dairy cows are not likely to effect a material change. Sources of data : Col. 1: California Cooperative Crop Reporting Service, annual reports, Sacramento. Col. 2: Obtained from col. 1 by arithmetic average of January for given year and January of following year. Col. 3: From table 8. Col. 4: Col. 3 divided by col. 2. Col. 5: From table 17. Col. 6: From table 11. TABLE 8 California Acreage, Yield per Acre, and Production of Alfalfa, 1919-1930 Year Acreage Yield Production 1919 1,000 acres 909 920 941 952 981 964 971 981 1,001 1,011 971 966 tons 365 3.70 3.70 3.80 3.80 3.75 4.20 4.00 4.20 4.20 4.30 4.50 1,000 tons 3,318 1920 3,404 1921 3,482 1922 3,618 3,728 1923 1924 3,615 1925 4,078 1926 3,924 1927 4,204 1928 4,246 4,175 4,347 1929 1930* * First revised estimate. Source of data: California Cooperative Crop Reporting Service, annual reports. Sacramento. Buu 521] Alfalfa 31 TABLE 9 Monthly Truck Movement of Alfalfa Hay from Antelope Valley and Imperial Valley, 1930-31, and Riverside District, 1927-28 to 1930-31 Antelope Valley Imperial Valley Riverside district Months 1930-31 Per cent of total 1930-31 Per cent of total Average of four years, 1927-28 to 1930-31 Per cent of total April tons 2,768 6,454 16,797 9,989 14,993 11,869 8,624 11,985 9,348 6,570 6,063 2,482 per cent 2.6 6.0 15.6 9 2 13.9 11.0 8.0 11.0 8 7 6.1 5 6 2 3 100 tons 9,865 10,012 14,172 12,481 11,619 7,971 5,456 5,424 5,307 6,993 4,691 10.002 per cent 9.5 9 6 13.6 12.0 11.2 7.7 5.3 5.2 5.1 6 7 4 5 9.6 100.0 tons 1,017 1,655 2,519 2,508 2,029 1,645 1,599 1,033 942 1,107 937 573 17.564 per cent 5.8 9.4 14 3 July 14.3 August September 11.5 9.4 9.1 November 5.9 5.4 6.3 5.3 March 3.3 Total 107,942 103,993 100 Sources of data: Antelope and Imperial: Compiled from records of T. J. Cameron, Federal-State Market News Service, Los Angeles. Riverside district : Compiled from records of the Riverside Alfalfa Growers Association, Riverside. TABLE 10 Receipts of Alfalfa Hay for 1930-31 Season at Los Angeles and All Hay at San Francisco During 1926-1930 Months April May June July August September. October November... December... January February March Total. Los Angeles 1930-31 1,044 1,219 1,389 1,379 1,320 874 895 1,028 980 720 891 12,619' Per cent of total per cent 7.0 8 3 9.7 11.0 10.9 10.5 7.1 8.1 7.8 5.7 7.0 100.0 San Francisco Average of five years, 1926-27 to 1930-31 tons 2,542 2,755 5,100 6,269 6,492 4,680 3,401 2,894 2,271 2,480 2,252 2,464 43,600 Per cent of total per cent 5.8 6.3 11.7 14.4 14.9 10.7 7.8 6.6 5.2 5.7 5.2 5.7 100.0 * This does not include receipts by truck at Puente and El Monte amounting to approxi- mately 30,000 tons. On the average 13 tons are considered to be equivalent to one carload. Sources of data: Los Angeles: Compiled from: Federal-State Grain, Hay and Feed Market News Service, Los Angeles, weekly issues. (Mimeo.) San Francisco: Grain Trade Reports, Grain Trade Association, San Francisco Cham- ber of Commerce. 32 University of California — Experiment Station TABLE 11 Price of Alfalfa Hay in Certain Markets and Districts in California and at Kansas City, 1910-11 to 1930-31 Crop year, April-March Los Angeles San Francisco Modesto, price to grower Imperial Valley, price to grower Modoc and Siskiyou counties, price to grower No. 1 Kansas City June-May dollars 1910-11. 1911-12. 1912-13. 1913-14. 1914-15 1915-16. 1916-17. 1917-18. 1918-19 1919-20 1920-21 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27 1927-28 1928-29. 1929-30 1930-31 15 00 15.00 13.37 16.95 26.20 24.00 24.40 29.30 18.54 21.75 23.70 26.25 22.65 21.70 21.65 23.00 22.35 16.45 dollars 10 30 11.05 12.75 11.70 7.90 10 75 13.40 20.60 19.65 21.80 24.30 14.65 16.65 17.05 22 30 16.60 15.65 17.65 19.65 2080 14.50 dollars 9.25 10.00 11.40 10.90 6.75 9 80 12.00 19.20 15 90 19.35 2065 12.10 16.45 16.55 19.75 14.60 14.30 16.35 16.65 16.50 10.70 dollars dollars 11.00 13.25 15.00 15.50 14.50 13.50 14.25 16 00 16 75 12.75 8.00 14.00 8.00 10.00 10 00 8.50 12.00 7.00 dollars 13.50 16 75 13.75 14.95 13.65 13.50 17.70 2650 30.70 32.40 24 55 19 85 21.50 23.70 20.10 21.15 19.15 20 40 24 80 22.30 20.20 Sources of data: Los Angeles area 1912-1922: Wright, R. V. Agricultural economics and ground water situation in the Antelope Valley, Los Angeles County. November, 1924. Unpublished report for the Federal Land Bank. 1923-1930: Riverside Alfalfa Growers Association prices. See table 12. The writer considers the prices of the Riverside Alfalfa Association more representative of price movements in the Los Angeles area than available published quotations until the Federal-State Market News Service on Hay was established at Los Angeles in September, 1929. 1930-1931: from table 14. San Francisco: from table 15. Modesto: from table 13. Imperial Valley: compiled by G. L. Winright, Assistant Farm Advisor, Imperial County, from records of representative growers and shippers. Modoc and Siskiyou counties: compiled from a special survey by J. C. Hays, Farm Advisor, Modoc County. Kansas City: from table 16. Bul. 521] Alfalfa 33 TABLE 12 Monthly Price to Grower of Choice Dairy Alfalfa Hay, in Dollars per Ton, Riverside,* 1923-24 to 1930-31 Years April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Aver- age 1923-24 21.24 21.69 22.00 21.00 20.31 20.92 22.58 17.84 21.24 21.69 21.57 19.88 19.88 20.76 21.32 17.65 22.00 21.67 20.91 19.30 19.41 20.53 20.53 17.58 22.00 21.67 20.21 19.28 19.44 20.38 20.38 15.02 20.18 26.27 20.36 20.03 19.45 19.84 21.50 14.36 20.18 26.27 21.28 20.38 20.36 20.67 22.20 16.65 22.83 27.51 22.47 22.04 21.91 22.00 23.38 16.94 22.83 27.51 24.07 23.48 23.70 23.36 23.82 15.61 26.00 26.00 29.92 29.92 23.70 1924-25 29.35 29.35 24.95 31.00 25.93 31.00 23.21 23.47 23.93 26 25 1925-26 24.80 22 65 1926-27 23.98 23.66 24.77 23.66 23.92 23.82 23.94 21.70 1927-28 21.65 1928-29 26.03 27.63 29.11 23.00 1929-30 25.50 15.14 27.43 15.07 21.65 15.03 18.00 15.00 22.35 1930-31 16 00 * Principally Hemet district. Source of data: Compiled from the records of the Riverside Alfalfa Growers Association, Riverside. TABLE 13 Monthly Price to Grower of Alfalfa Hay at Modesto, in Dollars per Ton, 1910-11 to 1930-31 Crop year 1910-11 1911-12 1912-13. 1913-14. 1914-15. 1915-16 1916-17. 1917-18 1918-19 1919-20. 1920-21. 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26. 1926-27. 1927-28. 1928-29 1929-30. 1930-31. April 8.00 11.00 12.25 14.00 6.50 8.00 12.50 21.50 18.50 16.00 31.00 16.00 16.00 19.00 20.00 15.00 14.00 13.75 18.00 21.00 12.00 May 8.00 11.00 11.00 14.00 6.50 7.00 9.50 23.50 15.50 16.50 24.00 13.00 15.50 18.00 18.00 13.00 12.00 13.50 14.00 16.00 10.00 June 8.00 9.00 10.00 12.50 6.25 7.00 9.50 13.50 13.50 15.50 21.50 11.00 12.50 14.25 18.50 13.00 12.50 15.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 July 8.00 9.00 10.25 12.00 6.00 7.50 10.75 13.75 15.50 14.50 21.50 11.00 13.25 14.00 20.00 12.50 12.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 10.00 Aug. 9.00 8.25 10.75 11.25 6.00 8.50 11.25 14.50 16.00 16.00 20.50 10.76 14.00 14.00 20.00 13.00 13.50 14.00 14.00 15.00 10.00 Sept. 10.00 8.00 11.00 10.25 6.00 9.00 11.25 16.00 16.00 16.50 20.50 10.75 17.00 14.00 20.25 13.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 13.00 Oct. 10.00 8.00 11.00 10.50 6.00 9.50 11.25 18.00 15.50 16.50 20.50 11.00 17.75 14.00 20.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 15.00 17.00 12.00 Nov. 10.00 9.00 11.00 11.00 6.00 10.50 11.25 20.50 16.50 18.50 21.00 12.00 19.50 15.50 18.75 16.00 16.00 17.00 17.00 18.00 10.00 Dec. 10.00 10.75 11.50 11.00 6.25 11.00 12.50 22.00 16.00 21.00 19.00 12.00 19.00 17.00 21.50 17.00 16.00 17.20 18.00 18.00 11.00 Jan. 9.75 12.00 12.76 9.25 6.50 12.00 12.50 22.50 15.00 23.50 16.00 12.00 20.00 19.50 22.00 17.50 16.50 20.00 17.00 18.00 11.00 Feb. 10.00 11.00 12.50 8.00 6.50 13.50 14.50 22.50 16.50 26.50 16.00 12.00 17.00 21.00 20.00 16.00 15.00 20.00 21.00 16.00 10.00 Mar. 10.50 13.00 12.75 7.25 6.50 14.00 17.50 22.00 16.50 31.00 16.00 13.50 16.00 18.25 18.00 14.00 15.00 20.00 21.00 14.00 9.50 Aver- 925 1000 11.40 10 90 6.25 12 00 19.23 15 90 19.35 20.65 12.10 16.45 16.55 19.75 14.60 14.30 16 35 16.65 16 50 1070 Sources of data : 1910-1924: Compiled by B. L. Hagglund, Assistant Farm Advisor, Stanislaus County, 1924. 1925-1927: Dairy Department of Stanislaus County Farm Bureau. The Dairy Situation, monthly issues. 1928-1930: Compiled by W. H. Brooks, Assistant Farm Advisor, Stanislaus County, from records of the Grange Company, Modesto. 34 University of California — Experiment Station TABLE 14 Monthly Price of Alfalfa Hay at Los Angeles, in Dollars per Ton, 1923-24 to 1930-31 Crop year 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27 1927-28 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31 April 21.00 27.00 24.00 21.75 21.00 23.50 23.60 17.70 May 21.00 22.00 22.50 21.50 20.00 22.00 22.00 18.40 June 21.00 21.50 22.00 20.13 20.00 21.40 21.75 16.90 July 21.00 24.00 21.00 18.50 20.00 19.75 21.70 16.00 Aug. 19.50 26.00 20.50 18.50 20.00 21.00 20.50 16.60 Sept 19.50 27.00 20.00 18,75 20.50 21.50 23.00 17.20 Oct. 21.00 28.00 22.00 19.60 21.90 23.50 23.00 16.65 Nov. 22.00 27.00 22.50 22.00 22.50 23.50 23.40 16.50 Dec. 24.00 27.00 22.50 22.00 22.50 23.50 26.90 15.50 Jan. 26.00 27.00 24.75 22.00 22.50 27.50 26.50 15.50 Feb. 25.50 28.00 24.50 21.25 23.50 30.00 24.75 15.50 Mar. 24.00 26.00 22.75 21.00 23.50 29.50 18.50 14.75 Aver- age 22 10 25.85 22.40 20 60 21.50 23.90 22.95 16.45 Sources of data : April, 1923-December, 1928: Courtesy of T. J. Cameron, local representative of Federal-State Grain, Hay and Feed Market News Service, Los Angeles. January, 1929-August, 1929: Choice Dairy as reported for Los Angeles in the Pacific Rural Press. September, 1929-March, 1931: U. S. No. 2 Leafy. Leafy quotations from: Federal-State Grain, Hay and Feed Market News Service, Los Angeles, weekly issues. (Mimeo.) TABLE 15 Monthly Price of Alfalfa Hay at San Francisco, in Dollars per Ton, 1910-11 to 1930-31 Crop year April May June July Aug. Sept Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Aver- age 1910-11 1911-12 1912-13 1913-14 1914-15 1915-16 1916-17 1917-18 1918-19 1919-20 1920-21 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26. 1926-27 1927-28. 1928-29. 1929-30. 1930-31. 1931-32 11.25 9.75 14.00 13.50 9.50 7.50 13.50 24.50 20.25 16.70 34. 50* 18.50 16.50 18.00 21.90 19.00 17.00 15.50 19.90 28.50 17.83 14.25 10.25 9.75 13.75 13.25 9.06 7.50 10.00 17.95 17.60 17.25 32.25 17.63 16.50 17.60 21.00 19.00 17.00 15.17 19.50 26.40 17.00 14.50 9.95 9.69 13.44 13.00 8.25 7.50 10.88 14.56 16.38 17.00 27.40 13.75 15.38 15.00 21.00 19.00 15.80 15.17 16.75 19.25 12.00 9.75 9.56 12.65 13.05 7.65 8.13 12.13 14.63 21.90 15.80 26.00 13.00 14.00 15.38 21.60 16.30 16.75 17.00 16.00 19.00 11.50 10.85 9.90 12.44 11.50 7.75 9.50 12.25 15.50 23.00 19.25 24.13 13.00 14.10 15.50 22.50 14.50 13.88 17.00 17.00 19.00 12.88 11.06 9.75 12.63 11.50 7.50 10.70 12.25 17.50 23.00 19. 50* 23.00 13.00 15.00 15.50 22.75 14.50 13.50 17.00 16.80 19.60 14.00 10.00 9.75 12.90 11.50 7.50 11.88 12.25 19.80 21.95 19.50' 23.00 13.38 17.25 15.50 24.10 14.50 14.63 17.33 16.50 19.50 14.13 10.00 10.15 13.25 11.50 7.50 12.00 12.25 22.75 20.00 21.25 s ' 23.50 14.10 1910 15.50 24.50 14.75 15.25 18.50 18.25 19.65 1460 10.00 13.19 11.80 11.90 7.50 12.00 13.50 24.88 18.00 23 90* 22.30 14.50 20.00 16.75 22.90 16.50 16.00 19.00 21.80 20.00 15.33 10.00 13.25 12.19 10.13 7.50 12.00 14.80 25.50 19.50 26.75' 18.63 14.50 19.50 19.00 23.00 17.00 16.00 19.00 23.00 20.00 15.75 10.38 13.63 12.00 9.88 7.50 14.88 17.00 25.75 17.50 30. 00* 18.50 14.50 16.60 20.50 21.88 17.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 20.00 15.25 10.25 14.50 12.00 9.50 7.50 15.70 20.25 23.67 17.00 34. 50* 18.50 16.00 16.00 20.50 20.25 17.00 15.80 21.17 26.30 18.50 13.75 10 30 11.05 12.75 11.70 7.90 10 75 13.40 20 60 1965 21.80 24.30 14.65 16.65 17.05 22.30 16.60 15 65 17 65 19.65 14 50 * No. 1 alfalfa hay. Sources of data: April, 1910-March, 1927: Compiled from the Pacific Rural Press. April, 1927-February, 1930: No. 1 Choice, compiled from the San Francisco Chronicle. March, 1930-May, 1931: U. S. No. 2 Leafy, compiled from: Federal-State Grain, Hay and Feed Market News Service, San Francisco, weekly issues. (Mimeo.) Bul. 521] Alfalfa 35 TABLE 16 Monthly Price of No. 1 Alfalfa Hay at Kansas City, in Dollars per Ton, 1910-11 to 1930-31 Crop year June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April May Aver- age 13.50 16.75 13 75 14.95 13 65 13 50 17.70 26.50 30.70 32 40 24.55 19.85 21.50 23.70 20.10 21 15 19.15 20.40 24.80 22.30 20 20 1910-11 1911-12 12.38 11.62 10.70 14.23 13.42 11.42 21.87 20.57 36.43 31.75 18.40 15.40 22.90 18.00 17.50 17.25 15.00 20.00 19.50 16.75 1912-13 1913-14 1914-15 1915-16 1916-17 1917-18 1918-19 1919-20 1920-21 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27 1927-28 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31 12.08 15.13 12.59 12.12 12.38 11.54 11.29 21.18 22.60 26.93 27.21 17.50 15.50 18.90 18.60 18.20 17.80 14.75 20.00 19.00 17.50 13.50 14.44 13.00 14.80 13.42 11.90 13.40 24.09 29.08 27.63 29.49 1900 15.80 20.90 20.00 19.5f 18.25 15.25 20.50 20.50 21.50 13.89 14.87 13.58 16.14 13.33 12.25 13.58 24.07 31.45 24.86 27.22 17.20 18.30 22.80 20.25 20.10 19.38 18.00 21.00 23.50 22.00 14.25 15.00 15.11 16.54 12.51 13.11 15.68 27.43 30.14 30.24 23.95 19.80 22.60 24.90 20.80 21.50 19.90 19.50 23.25 24.25 22.25 14.25 15.27 15.11 16.00 13.21 12.83 18.50 31.10 31.21 33.39 25.05 20.40 23.80 24.80 21.25 21.25 20.67 20.00 25.00 24.75 23.25 14.23 15.50 15.00 16.01 13.79 14.35 19.33 32.76 31.01 35.10 23.01 19.60 23.00 24.90 22.70 21.40 20.40 22.25 26.00 22.75 22.50 13.51 17.72 14.79 15.96 13.75 14.54 19.81 30.01 32.85 35.75 23.30 20.00 23.40 25.30 22.70 22.15 20.00 21.50 28.25 23.75 21.50 12 93 18.37 1286 15.25 13.73 15.34 20.25 31.33 31.01 34.83 20.30 19.60 23.70 23.50 19.25 21.56 19.25 22.50 28.75 23.00 19.50 13.07 20.49 14.06 15.18 14.75 13.92 20.10 27.56 34.56 33.79 20.30 22.10 24.60 24.70 19.60 22.81 18.75 24.25 29.75 22.00 19.75 13.67 22.73 13.75 15.30 15.11 14.44 24.33 24.11 37.90 34.10 21.00 22.50 26.25 25.10 18.90 24.62 19.00 26.00 29.25 23.00 19.25 13.29 19.34 13.28 15.54 13.73 14.45 24.52 22.64 36.20 35.46 22.20 22.10 25.90 24.50 19.20 23.25 19.00 26.00 26.00 21.75 17.25 Sources of data: 1910-1926: U. S. Dept.Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture. 1926:992. 1927. 1927-1931 : U. S. Dept. Agr. Crops and Markets, monthly issues. 36 University of California — Experiment Station TABLE 17 Price of Alfalfa Meal at San Francisco and Kansas City in Dollars per Ton, 1921-22 to 1930-31 April-March San Francisco Kansas City 1 2 1921-22 dollars 23.54 25.81 27.24 3059 26 23 24.73 24 96 2719 29.10 23.92 dollars 17.87 1922-23 22.81 1923-24 24.71 1924-25 22.51 1925-26 2364 1926-27 22.83 1927-28 23.46 1928-29 29.05 1929-30. 26.17 1930-31 23.74 Sources of data : Col. 1: 1921-March, 1926: Compiled from the San Fran- cisco Chronicle. April, 1926-May, 1927: Compiled from the San Francisco Examiner. June, 1927-March, 1931 : U. S. Dept. Agr. Crops and Mar- kets, monthly issues. Col. 2: April, 1921-December, 1930: U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture, 1931:812. 1931. January-March, 1931: U. S. Dept. Agr. Crops and Mar- kets, monthly issues. TABLE 18 Price of Certain Feed Concentrates at San Francisco, in Dollars per Ton, 1921-22 to 1930-31 April-March average Ground barley Bran Cotton- seed Linseed meal Beet pulp Cracked corn Rolled oats Arith- metic average Weighted average* 1921-22 29.85 31.10 34.62 47.52 36.66 28.96 39.60 35.99 32.38 25.28 30 28 35.34 34.33 38.54 38.89 34.34 38.21 38.15 33.93 27.06 39.90 52.29 51.30 49.60 4900 41.43 43.87 51.04 45.36 39.30 43.85 56.86 54.12 53.37 53.09 52.85 50.73 54.61 54.70 42.09 30.10 38.04 41.32 39 08 38.05 41.42 36.85 36.68 38.04 29.00 38.34 39.48 45.40 53.19 51.92 44.74 47.92 49.91 49.14 40.09 35.83 42.15 43 68 48.15 40.66 34.73 47.48 46.98 43.71 32.14 35.45 42.18 43.54 47.06 44.04 39.78 43.52 44.77 42.47 33 57 34.14 1922-23 40.43 1923-24 41.60 1924-25 46 08 1925-26 42.41 1926-27...* 37.98 1927-28 ... 42.09 1928-29.. . . 42 66 1929-30 40 02 1930-31 31.69 * Weights used: ground barley 4, bran 3, cottonseed 2, linseed 2, cracked corn 1, rolled oats 1. Feeds move freely from market to market. Price changes of feeds from one season to another at San Francisco reflect, therefore, price changes of feeds in other parts of California. Sources of data: Ground barley, bran, cottonseed, cracked corn, rolled oats compiled from the Pacific Rural Press. Beet pulp and certain quotations on cottonseed compiled from the San Francisco Chronicle. Bul. 521" Alfalfa 37 TABLE 19 Distribution of Alfalfa Production and Dairy Cows in California by Specified Counties, 1919 and 1929 Section and county Alfalfa production 1919 1929 Number of dairy cows 1919 1929 San Joaquin Valley: total Stanislaus Tulare Merced Fresno San Joaquin Kern Kings Madera Contra Costa Sacramento Valley : total.. Yolo Sacramento Cenn Colusa Solano Butte Tehama Sutter Yuba Piacer South of the Tehachapi: total Imperial Los Angeles Riverside San Bernardino Ventura Orange San Diego Other counties: total Grand total tons 1,344,919 206,959 277,135 232,974 255,322 144,896 93,799 71,581 41,542 20,711 292,025 44,751 51,614 43,646 22,360 33,863 31,449 34,123 22,948 5,866 1,405 376,671 96,430 122,131 74,898 43,395 8,912 10,784 20,121 2,412,554 per cent 55.8 8.6 11.5 9.7 10.6 6.0 3.9 30 1.7 0.8 12.1 1.9 2.1 1.8 0.9 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.0 0.2 0.1 15.6 4.0 5.1 3.1 1.8 0.4 0.4 0.8 16.5 tons 1,340,522 278,714 212,612 210,861 195,901 187,579 92,495 82,046 55,776 24,538 336,596 74,430 55,119 50,324 35,050 30,403 30,084 28,776 25,768 4,936 1,706 699,411 322,335 164,038 83,507 64,058 28,348 23,885 13,240 417,291 100.0 2,793,820 per cent 48.0 10.0 7.6 7.6 7.0 6.7 3.3 2.9 2.0 0.9 12.0 2.7 2.0 1.8 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.8 2 1 25.1 11.5 5.9 3.0 2.3 1.0 0.9 0.5 14 9 head 181,372 36,297 28,951 31,640 23,290 21,246 6,674 18,063 5,286 9,925 54,905 7,187 12,619 5,487 2,794 8,421 5,951 3,231 5,362 1,797 2,056 71,931 24,434 24,211 5,108 4,714 2,226 4,014 7,224 194,207 100.0 502,415 per cent 36.1 7.2 5.8 6.3 4.6 4.2 1.3 3.6 1.1 2.0 10.9 1.4 2.5 1.1 0.6 1.6 1.2 0.6 1.1 0.4 4 14.3 4 9 4.8 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.8 1.4 38.7 100.0 head 210,199 40,318 34,974 37,768 25,773 29,135 7,562 19,372 7,306 7,991 52,108 7,257 8,180 7,535 4,384 6,251 4,998 4,262 4,809 2,352 2,080 102,888 23,573 44,237 5,794 11,447 3,070 5,462 9,305 206,764 571,959 per cent 36.8 7.1 6.1 6.6 4.5 5.1 1.3 3.4 1.3 1.4 9.1 1.3 17.9 4.1 7.7 10 2.0 5 1.0 1.6 36.2 100.0 Sources of data : 1919: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census. 1929: U. S. Dept. Com. Bur. of the Census. 1920. County tables II and IV. 1930, preliminary release. (Mimeo.) STATION PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION BULLETINS No. 253. Irrigation and Soil Conditions in the Sierra Nevada Foothills, California. 263. Size Grades for Ripe Olives. 279. Irrigation of Rice in California. 283. The Olive Insects of California. 310. Plum Pollination. 331. Phylloxera-resistant Stocks. 335. Cocoanut Meal as a Feed for Dairy Cows and Other Livestoek. 343. Cheese Pests and Their Control. 348. Pruning Young Olive Trees. 349. A Study of Sidedraft and Tractor Hitches. 357. A Self-Mixing Dusting Machine for Applying Dry Insecticides and Fun- gicides. 361. Preliminary Yield Tables for Second- Growth Redwood. 364. Fungicidal Dusts for the Control of Bunt. 368. Bacterial Decomposition of Olives During Pickling. 369. Comparison of Woods for Butter Boxes. 370. Factors Influencing the Development of Internal Browning of the Yellow Newtown Apple. 371. The Relative Cost of Yarding Small and Large Timber. 373. Pear Pollination. 374. A Survey of Orchard Practices in the Citrus Industry of Southern Cali- fornia. 379. Walnut Culture in California. 386. Pruning Bearing Deciduous Fruit Trees. 389. Berseem or Egyptian Clover. 392. Fruit Juice Concentrates. 393. Crop Sequences at Davis. 394. I. Cereal Hay Production in California. II. Feeding Trials with Cereal Hays. 396. The Mat Bean, Phaseolus Aconitifolius. 404. The Dehydration of Prunes. 406. Stationary Spray Plants in California. 407. Yield, Stand, and Volume Tables for White Fir in the California Pine Region. 408. Alternaria Rot of Lemons. 409. The Digestibility of Certain Fruit By- products as Determined for Rumi- nants. Part I. Dried Orange Pulp and Raisin Pulp. 410. Factors Influencing the Quality of Fresh Asparagus After it is Harvested. 416. Culture of the Oriental Persimmon in California. 417. Poultry Feeding: Principles and Prac- tice. 418. A Study of Various Rations for Fin- ishing Range Calves as Baby Beeves. 419. Economic Aspects of the Cantaloupe Industry. 420. Rice and Rice By-Products as Feeds for Fattening Swine. 421. Beef Cattle Feeding Trials, 1921-24. 423. Apricots (Series on California Crops and Prices). 425. Apple Growing in California. 426. Apple Pollination Studies in California. 427. The Value of Orange Pulp for Milk Production. 428. The Relation of Maturity of California Plums to Shipping and Dessert Quality. 431. Raisin By-Products and Bean Screen- ings as Feeds for Fattening Lambs. 432. Some Economic Problems Involved in the Pooling of Fruit. No. 433. Power Requirements of Electrically Driven Dairy Manufacturing Equip- ment. 435, The Problem of Securing Closer Rela- tionship between Agricultural Devel- opment and Irrigation Construction. 436. I. The Kadota Fig. II. The Kadota Fig Products. 439. The Digestibility of Certain Fruit By- Products as Determined for Rumi- nants. Part II. Dried Pineapple Pulp, Dried Lemon Pulp, and Dried Olive Pulp. 440. The Feeding Value of Raisins and Dairy By-Products for Growing and Fattening Swine. 445. Economic Aspects of the Apple In- dustry. 446. The Asparagus Industry in California. 447. A Method of Determining the Clean Weights of Individual Fleeces of Wool. 448. Farmers' Purchase Agreement for Deep Well Pumps. 449. Economic Aspects of the Watermelon Industry. 450. Irrigation Investigations with Field Crops at Davis, and at Delhi, Cali- fornia, 1909-1925. 452. Economic Aspects of the Pear Industry. 454. Rice Experiments in Sacramento Val- ley, 1922-1927. 455. Reclamation of the Fresno Type of Black-Alkali Soil. 456. Yield, Stand and Volume Tables for Red Fir in California. 458. Factors Influencing Percentage Calf Crop in Range Herds. 459. Economic Aspects of the Fresh Plum Industry. 462. Prune Supply and Price Situation. 464. Drainage in the Sacramento Valley Rice Fields. 465. Curly Top Symptoms of the Sugar Beet. 466. The Continuous Can Washer for Dairy Plants. 467. Oat Varieties in California. 468. Sterilization of Dairy Utensils with Humidified Hot Air. 469. The Solar Heater. 470. Maturity Standards for Harvesting Bartlett Pears for Eastern Shipment. 471. The Use of Sulfur Dioxide in Shipping Grapes. 472. Adobe Construction. 473. Economic Aspects of the Sheep In- dustry. 474. Factors Affecting the Cost of Tractor Logging in the California Pine Region. 475. Walnut Supply and Price Situation. 476. Poultry Houses and Equipment. 477. Improved Methods of Harvesting Grain Sorghum. 479. I. Irrigation Experiments with Peaches in California. II. Canning Quality of Irrigated Peaches. 480. The Use, Value, and Cost of Credit in Agriculture. 481. Utilization of Wild Oat Hay for Fat- tening Yearling Steers. 482. Substitutes for Wooden Breakpins. 483. Utilization of Surplus Prunes. 484. The Effects of Desiccating Winds on Citrus Trees. 485. Drying Cut Fruits. BULLETINS— ( Continued ) No. 486. White Pullorum Disease (Bacillary Diarrhea of Chickens). Asparagus (Series on California Crops and Prices). Cherries (Series on California Crops and Prices). 489. Irrigation Water Requirement Studies of Citrus and Avocado Trees in San Diego County, California, 1926 and 1927. Olive Thinning and Other Means of Increasing Size of Olives. Yield, Stand, and Volume Tables for Douglas Fir in California. Berry Thinning of Grapes. Fruit Markets in Eastern Asia. Infectious Bronchitis in Fowls. Milk Cooling on California Dairy Farms. 496. Precooling of Fresh Fruits and Tem- peratures of Refrigerator Cars and Warehouse Rooms. 487. 488. 490. 491. 492. 493. 494. 495. No. 497. A Study of the Shipment of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables to the Far East. 498. Pickling Green Olives. 499. Air Cleaners for Motor Vehicles. 500 501 502 Dehydration of Grapes. Marketing California Apples. Wheat (Series on California Crops and Prices) . St. Johnswort on Range Lands of California. Economic Problems of California Agri- culture. (A Report to the Governor of California.) 505. The Snowy Tree Cricket and Other Insects Injurious to Raspberries. Fruit Spoilage Disease of Figs. Cantaloupe Powdery Mildew in the Imperial Valley. 508. The Swelling of Canned Prunes. The Biological Control of Mealybugs Attacking Citrus. 503. 504. 506 507 509. CIRCULARS No. No. 115. Grafting Vinifera Vineyards. 279. 127. House Fumigation. 178. The Packing of Apples in California. 282. 212. Salvaging Rain-Damaged Prunes. 230. Testing Milk, Cream, and Skim Milk 288. for Butterfat. 290. 232. Harvesting and Handling California 292. Cherries for Eastern Shipment. 294. 239. Harvesting and Handling Apricots and 296. Plums for Eastern Shipment. 240. Harvesting and Handling California 301. Pears for Eastern Shipment. 304. 241. Harvesting and Handling California 305. Peaches for Eastern Shipment. 307. 244. Central Wire Bracing for Fruit Trees. 308. 245. Vine Pruning Systems. 310. 248. Some Common Errors in Vine Pruning and Their Remedies. 311. 249. Replacing Missing Vines. 312. 253. Vineyard Plans. 257. The Small-Seeded Horse Bean (Vicia , faba var. minor). 316. 258. Thinning Deciduous Fruits. 259. Pear By-Products. 317. 261. Sewing Grain Sacks. 262. Cabbage Production in California. 318. 265. Plant Disease and Pest Control. 319. 266. Analyzing the Citrus Orchard by Means 320. of Simple Tree Records. 269. An Orchard Brush Burner. 321. 270. A Farm Septic Tank. 276. Home Canning. 278. Olive Pickling in Mediterranean Countries. The Preparation and Refining of Olive Oil in Southern Europe. Prevention of Insect Attack on Stored Grain. Phylloxera Resistant Vineyards. The Tangier Pea. Alkali Soils. Propagation of Deciduous Fruits. Control of the California Ground Squirrel. Buckeye Poisoning of the Honey Bee. Drainage on the Farm. Liming the Soil. American Foulbrood and Its Control. Cantaloupe Production in Calif oi-nia. The Operation of the Bacteriological Laboratory for Dairy Plants. The Improvement of Quality in Figs. Principles Governing the Choice, Oper- ation, and Care of Small Irrigation Pumping Plants. Electrical Statistics for California Farms. Fertilizer Problems and Analysis of Soils in California. Termites and Termite Damage. Pasteurizing Milk for Calf Feeding. Preservation of Fruits and Vegetables by Freezing: Storaere. Treatment of Lime-induced Chlorosis with Iron Salts. 15m-12,'31