Arfhur W. Sampson- Pioneer Range Scienfisf ____..______ ___ _______ ______ ________ ________________________ 345 Porfraii of fhe Man... _..._____ _________ _____ _ ________ ___________________ _____ .-.-Kenneth W. Parker 346 Research Wifh fhe Foresf Service... _____ ____________________ ____ . . . ..W. R. Chapline 347 Esfablishmenf of a Universify
Curriculum ___._... _ _______ _ ____ . . . ..Lloyd W. Swift and George W. Craddock 347 Teaching and Research af fhe Universify.. ____ _ ________ __ _____ Hudson G. Reynolds 349 Professor Emerifus Years...Donald R. Cornelius and Harold H. Biswell 350 Chronological Bibliography ______ _______ __.____ _______ __ _______ . . . ..Hudson G. Reynolds 351 Rangelands-Challenge fo fhe Nafion ____ ___ _____ _____ ____ . . . ..James H. Jensen 353 Rangelands-Challenge fo fhe Mind _________ ________________________________ _____ . . ..Wynne Thorne 354 Fire Effecfs on Blue Grama-Pinyon-Juniper Rangeland in
New Mexico __________._____ _ ____ ____ ________ ____ ____ _ _____.____ Don D. Dwyer and Rex D. Pieper 359 Boysag Poinf: Relief Area on Norfh Rim of Grand Canyon,
Arizona _____...____._._____ Ervin M. Schmutz, Charles C. Michaels, and B. Ira Judd 363 Discovering Grazing Values __..__.__ _ ______ ____________ _____ ___________._ ____ . . . ..N. K. Roberts 369 Profifabilify and Flexibilify of Two Range Caffle Sysfems in fhe Rolling
Plains of Texas ________ _____ ____ _________________ ____ ____ ______ _ _______ _____________ _______ Calvin C. Boykin 375 Effecf of Seedling Numbers on Bifferbrush
Survival.... ____ _ _______ _ _________ _____ _____ . . . ..Robert B. Ferguson and Joseph V. Basile 380 Grazing Sysfems as Mefhods of Managing fhe
Range Resources ____________ _ ___________ _ _________._ __.__ _______ ___________ ____. . . ..E. William Anderson 383 Chemical Curing of Range Grasses wifh Paraquaf ________ _ ____ _ ______ Forrest A. Sneva 389 Seasonal Suifabilify, A Grazing Sysfem for Ranges of Diverse Vegefafion
Types and Condifion Classes ________________ _________________ __________ . . . ..K. A. Valentine 395 Responses of Squirrelfail and Needleandfhread fo
Herbage Removal _____________ _ _____ _________ ____ _ ____ ________ _______ ____________ _.________ Henry A. Wright 398 Firsf Twenfy Years of fhe American Sociefy of Range
Managemenf .__.___________ ______ ________ _ ________ ________ _______ __________ ______ . . . ..John D. Freeman 400 Technical Nofes:
Herbage Responses fo Fire and Liffer Removal on Soufhern
Bluesfern Range..._ _______._____ ____ __.__ .____________________ H. E. Grelen and E. A. Epps, Jr. 403 Caffle Dief Digesfibilifies Defermined from Componenfs...Henry A. Pearson 405 Managemenf Nofes:
Cresfed Wheafgrass for Spring Grazing in Norfhern
New Mexico __________ _ ______ _____ ___________ ____ _______ H. W. Springfield and Elbert H. Reid 406 Book Reviews:
Grass Land ____ _ ____ _____ ______ ____ ________ ____ _________________ _ ___________ __________ _______ Charles A. Poulton 408 Proceedings X Iniernafional Grassland Congress...S. Clark Martin et al. 409 The Fuiure Environmenfs of Norfh America _____ _ _______ ______ ____ . ..James K. Lewis 411 New Publicafions _____ _ _______________ _ ____ ________ ______________ _ _____ ________ ____ _ ._________________ ____ ____ ___________________ 411 News and Nofes _______ ____________ ______ ___ _____ ___ ________ _ __________ __ _______ _______ _____ _ ____________ ___________________________ 412 Ediforial, Wanf To Be A Sociefy Officer?_ _____________ _____ ____. _ ____ _ _____. John G. Clouston 414
Wifh fhe Secfions.... __________________.__ _ ______._____.______._______ _ ______ _____ _______ ______ ______ _ _______________ ______________ 415 Convention Preview ________. _ _______________.___________________ ________ ____________________________________ __._ _.__ _ _______ ___ 419 Sociefy Business ____ ______________ ________.________ _ _____________________ _____________ ________ ____ ______________ _____________ _______ 423 Program, 21sf Annual Meefing, Albuquerque ___. _ _______ _ ________ _______ ________ _______ ____ ____ _______ ____ 423 Index ___._____________ _____ ______.________ ____ _____ _ _________ _ _________________ ___________ ______ ______ ____ _ __________ _________ _____ ________ 428
Cover
P&-Crested
Wheafgrass for Spring Graz-
ing in Northern New Mexico
Dr. Arthur W. Sampson (1884-1967) Scholar, Scientist, and Educator
Arthur W. Sampson-Pioneer
Range Scientist
Highlight
Arthur W. Sampson, infernafion- ally known range scientist, plant ecologisf and professor of forestry, died of pneumonia in San Francisco, California, February 7. 1967. This brief biography by his former close friends, associafes, and students is affectionately dedicated io his mem- ory.
Poriraif
of the Man
KENNETH W. PARKER Director, Range Management and Wildlife Habitat Research, Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C.
,
“Sammy,” as he was affec- tionately called by his wife, stu- dents, and associates, was born March 27, 1884, in Oakland, Ne- braska. There he received his primary and secondary educa- tion. He attended the University of Nebraska, receiving the B.S. degree in 1906 and the M.A. de- gree the following year. Addi- tional post-graduate study was taken at Johns Hopkins Univer- sity in 1914 and 1915, and George Washington University in 1917, where he was awarded the Ph.D. degree in Plant Ecology and Climatology.
Sammy started his profes- sional career in 1907 as an as- sistant plant ecologist with the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. His career in the Forest Service extended until 1922 when he accepted an ap- pointment as Associate Profes- sor of Forestry with the Univer- sity of California at Berkeley. He became Professor in 1940. He served at this institution until the time of his death. Although retiring as Professor Emeritus in 1951, he maintained regular office hours thereafter. His last major research contribution of 1963 appeared more than a full half century after his first pub- lication. He married a longtime sweetheart, Helen Rannells of
Manhattan, Kansas, December 28, 1940-his only survivor.
Sammy had a wide range of interests-the natural sciences, people, humor, athletics; regard- less of his interests, he was al- ways among the front runners. At the University of Nebraska he won gold medals in 440, 880, and mile relay track events in 1904, 1905, 1906. Even after graduation he won medals in his specialty at meets at Walla Walla County Fair in 1908, George Washington University in 1909, Johns Hopkins Univer- sity and Georgetown University in 1910.
His interest in physical fitness and athletics continued through- out his life. While Director of the Great Basin Experiment Sta- tion (1912-1922) he wrestled pro- fessionally at local County Fairs. At the Station headquarters as daily exercise Sammy is re- ported to have tossed a heavy medicine ball to the top of a 35- foot flagpole. He remained al- ways an avid supporter of the “Cornhuskers” and the “Golden Bears,” especially in track and football. Even in the off years of “poor Cal,” he always had season tickets, attending both track and football events. While on his honeymoon, after a stren- uous day afield, he left his bride with a former student, to rush to the nearest radio in Globe, Arizona, to hear a World’s Championship Heavy Weight fight. Up until the time of his death he could hold his own with most anyone at horseshoes.
His sense of humor was great, but a “salty” story always had to have a point. He would often relate these stories with serious mien as a personal experience, much to the amazement and dis- belief of the listener. He always had an anecdote in store for the
346
campus policeman, the janitor, or whoever he thought might appreciate it.
The stories by or about Sam- my are a legend among his former students and associates. As an example: He was so wrapped up in his teaching and research that he was inclined to be absentminded. His apartment was close enough so that he usually walked to his office. He once reported his car as being stolen from his garage and the police advised him it was parked on the street where he had left it, with seven overnight parking tickets!
Sammy had an intense inter- est in people, their personal lives, welfare, and future-re- gardless of race, creed, or color. To the janitor he was always a soft touch for a temporary loan, if it was repaid promptly. He was adept at finding jobs for the needy student, particularly those whom he considered should be encouraged to undertake post-graduate study. If he did not have the funds to hire the student he usually located an- other professor who did. Some- times it was a “make work” na- ture, or arranging for a tutoring job-but always of benefit intel- lectually to the student.
range management; among the first to utilize lysimeters (Low- dermilk), grow grasses in phy- tometers in different soil hori- zons (Sinclair), grow grasses in nutrient solution to determine effect of various levels of defoli- ation (Parker), recommend re- search in U.S. on biological con-
SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST
trol of St. Johnswort or Klamath weed (Parker), and to study the movement of carbohydrates in range forage plants (McCarty).
During his later years, with the Forest Service, Sammy gave short courses in range manage- ment at the Universities of Ne- braska, Syracuse, and Cornell.
Research with the Forest Service (19074921)
W. R. CHAPLINEFormer Chief, Division of Range Research, Forest Ser- vice, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C.
At about the time Dr. Sampson completed his gradu- ate work at the University of Nebraska, serious range problems were developing on the forest reserves of the West. In 1905 the forest reserves were transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture and their administration as National Forests was initiated by consolidating them with the Bureau of Forestry to form the Forest Service.
Livestock numbers were at a peak; the livestock industry, accustomed to free range and having generally little knowledge of proper management, was firmly entrenched; feuds simmered between cattlemen and sheepmen and in between these groups the small home- steader was attempting to hold his own. Sheep grazing was considered by foresters as incompatible with timber reproduction. Much of the range was rapidly deteriorat- ing and many watersheds were already in critical con- dition. Factual management information was urgently needed by Forest administrators.
Albert F. Potter, Chief of Grazing in the Forest Service, arranged with Dr. F. V. Coville, Botanist of the Bureau of Plant Industry, in 1907 for the selection of Sampson and James T. Jardine as Forest Service researchers to study urgent range problems in the mountains of eastern Oregon. Under Dr. Coville’s co- operation and general guidance, and with Sampson’s ecological and other botanical background, obtained from such professors as Dean Chas. E. Bessey of Ne- braska, Sampson was well equipped to undertake the important studies assigned to him.
Sampson’s studies furnished essential information for determining ways and means of using the forage con- sistent with the growth requirements of the vegetation. They led to understanding grazing values of the native plants, better seasons of grazing, and refinement of deferred and rotation systems of grazing. Studies were also made of reseeding deteriorated Oregon mountain meadows with cultivated forage plants. During 1911 the studies of reseeding mountain meadows were extended into other states and studies were undertaken, in coop- eration with William A. Dayton, of the relation of grazing to timber reproduction on the Shasta National Forest in California.
1 Chapline served as a grazing assistant under Sampson in 1913-1914.
When the Utah
347
These assignments whetted his appetite for teaching, together with his continued interest in research, and led to his accep- tance in 1922 of the teaching and research opportunities of- fered by the University of Cali- f ornia.
(later Great Basin) Experiment Sta- tion was established on the Wasatch Plateau of central Utah in 1912, Dr. Sampson became its first director and served as such until 1922. From a range standpoint, the aim of this Station was to make more fundamental studies of growth and efficient use of the range forage in relation to: sustained grazing capacity and improve- ment of depleted ranges, climate of the several eleva- tion zones, erosion control and flood prevention, suitable seasons of grazing the different elevational zones, the influence of grazing on aspen reproduction (a major forest tree of the area), and the adverse effect of current heavy grazing of oak brush.
Sammy undertook research with vigor. With the aid of well-directed assistantsr, he developed important an- swers to these problems or carried them to the point where more conclusive answers could be obtained. He also developed a considerable understanding of range plants, their life history and forage value, and the plant succession process in its relation to range improvement and deterioration, especially on high mountain ranges.
He initiated the A and B watershed study on the Wasatch Plateau at the Great Basin Station in 1912. This paired watershed experiment was the first of its kind to demonstrate that herbaceous vegetation can profoundly affect storm runoff and erosion-a hydro- logic fact that most livestock graziers, many engineers, and some foresters had been unwilling to accept.
Research activities relating to harvesting, regenera- tion, and establishment of forests through planting were conducted by forest associates, among whom were the late Frederick S. Baker, Dean, School of Forestry, Uni- versity of California, and C. F. Korstian, Dean, School of Forestry, Duke University.
Esiablishmenf of a University
Curriculum (19224932)
LLOYD W. SWIFT AND GEORGE W. CRADDOCK Formerly Director, Division of Wildlife Management, Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C. and Asst. Director, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah.
range management; among the first to utilize lysimeters (Low- dermilk), grow grasses in phy- tometers in different soil hori- zons (Sinclair), grow grasses in nutrient solution to determine effect of various levels of defoli- ation (Parker), recommend re- search in U.S. on biological con-
SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST
trol of St. Johnswort or Klamath weed (Parker), and to study the movement of carbohydrates in range forage plants (McCarty).
During his later years, with the Forest Service, Sammy gave short courses in range manage- ment at the Universities of Ne- braska, Syracuse, and Cornell.
Research with the Forest Service (19074921)
W. R. CHAPLINEFormer Chief, Division of Range Research, Forest Ser- vice, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C.
At about the time Dr. Sampson completed his gradu- ate work at the University of Nebraska, serious range problems were developing on the forest reserves of the West. In 1905 the forest reserves were transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture and their administration as National Forests was initiated by consolidating them with the Bureau of Forestry to form the Forest Service.
Livestock numbers were at a peak; the livestock industry, accustomed to free range and having generally little knowledge of proper management, was firmly entrenched; feuds simmered between cattlemen and sheepmen and in between these groups the small home- steader was attempting to hold his own. Sheep grazing was considered by foresters as incompatible with timber reproduction. Much of the range was rapidly deteriorat- ing and many watersheds were already in critical con- dition. Factual management information was urgently needed by Forest administrators.
Albert F. Potter, Chief of Grazing in the Forest Service, arranged with Dr. F. V. Coville, Botanist of the Bureau of Plant Industry, in 1907 for the selection of Sampson and James T. Jardine as Forest Service researchers to study urgent range problems in the mountains of eastern Oregon. Under Dr. Coville’s co- operation and general guidance, and with Sampson’s ecological and other botanical background, obtained from such professors as Dean Chas. E. Bessey of Ne- braska, Sampson was well equipped to undertake the important studies assigned to him.
Sampson’s studies furnished essential information for determining ways and means of using the forage con- sistent with the growth requirements of the vegetation. They led to understanding grazing values of the native plants, better seasons of grazing, and refinement of deferred and rotation systems of grazing. Studies were also made of reseeding deteriorated Oregon mountain meadows with cultivated forage plants. During 1911 the studies of reseeding mountain meadows were extended into other states and studies were undertaken, in coop- eration with William A. Dayton, of the relation of grazing to timber reproduction on the Shasta National Forest in California.
1 Chapline served as a grazing assistant under Sampson in 1913-1914.
When the Utah
347
These assignments whetted his appetite for teaching, together with his continued interest in research, and led to his accep- tance in 1922 of the teaching and research opportunities of- fered by the University of Cali- f ornia.
(later Great Basin) Experiment Sta- tion was established on the Wasatch Plateau of central Utah in 1912, Dr. Sampson became its first director and served as such until 1922. From a range standpoint, the aim of this Station was to make more fundamental studies of growth and efficient use of the range forage in relation to: sustained grazing capacity and improve- ment of depleted ranges, climate of the several eleva- tion zones, erosion control and flood prevention, suitable seasons of grazing the different elevational zones, the influence of grazing on aspen reproduction (a major forest tree of the area), and the adverse effect of current heavy grazing of oak brush.
Sammy undertook research with vigor. With the aid of well-directed assistantsr, he developed important an- swers to these problems or carried them to the point where more conclusive answers could be obtained. He also developed a considerable understanding of range plants, their life history and forage value, and the plant succession process in its relation to range improvement and deterioration, especially on high mountain ranges.
He initiated the A and B watershed study on the Wasatch Plateau at the Great Basin Station in 1912. This paired watershed experiment was the first of its kind to demonstrate that herbaceous vegetation can profoundly affect storm runoff and erosion-a hydro- logic fact that most livestock graziers, many engineers, and some foresters had been unwilling to accept.
Research activities relating to harvesting, regenera- tion, and establishment of forests through planting were conducted by forest associates, among whom were the late Frederick S. Baker, Dean, School of Forestry, Uni- versity of California, and C. F. Korstian, Dean, School of Forestry, Duke University.
Esiablishmenf of a University
Curriculum (19224932)
LLOYD W. SWIFT AND GEORGE W. CRADDOCK Formerly Director, Division of Wildlife Management, Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Washington, D.C. and Asst. Director, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah.
348 SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST
First Range Class
Previous experience in research and in the classroom had prepared Sammy well for his first class at Berkeley. Some students in this initial group who were looking for easy credits felt that Sammy was overly prepared and had included too much material for the time al- lowed. This could well have been true, as Sammy was bursting with ideas and information gathered from his penetrating studies of range management and ecology, and was eager to share them with his students.
Sammy quickly made it clear that he intended to teach range management on a professional and “no- nonsense” basis, as is colorfully attested by one of his first students (Don Leidig):
“As I recall, in 1922 some seven or eight seniors took Sammy’s first course more or less as a lark and out of curiosity. We almost all had more units than we needed to graduate and four or five of us, who were full of pep, sat in the back row and were noisy. At the end of his lecture, he requested us to remain after class, and gave us a real going-over. When Sammy was angry, he reminded me of a coiled rattle- snake, until he grinned, and then it was like sun breaking through a Utah desert thundercloud. He told us he was not going to stand for any ‘messing around’ in class, but if we so desired he would show us off-campus that he could out-story tell, out-box, and, if necessary, out-party any of us. A couple of evening tours with Sammy in San Francisco night- spots proved he was not bragging. Needless to say, we few potential big-shot Forestry seniors ceased to be trouble and became close friends with this wonder- ful educator.”
A Range Management Curriculum
Sammy didn’t limit teaching to his first formal range class. He was aware of the urgent need in the U.S. Forest Service for trained range men. The hurdle for employment was the Junior Range Examiner examina- tion, which at that time was a two-day written ordeal, occurring once a year. He persuaded seven or eight of his first class to point for this entrance test, and then helped them by providing many extra-hour seminars and tutoring on phases yet to be included in the forestry curriculum. All of this first group, and many others in succeeding years, passed this examination with qualify- ing grades. Such accomplishment further attests to the excellent training that Sammy initiated soon after he came to Berkeley.
Sammy firmly believed that range training should be supplemented by a good understanding of the physi- cal, biological, and economic sciences that are related to the range resource. This philosophy was fully shared and encouraged by Professor Walter Mulford, then head of the Forestry Division, but not so enthusiastically by others on the forestry staff. However, through logical argument, persistence, and sometimes guileful per- suasion, he won staff approval not only for additional specialized range courses but also for permission for range majors to substitute range-oriented electives in lieu of some of the traditional forestry courses.
To foster the broadening of range training, he also developed friendly and cooperative working relations with key people in other divisions, departments, and colleges on the Berkeley campus, and at the Agriculture Branch College in Davis. These contacts opened the door for many students in search of electives beyond the fields of forestry and range.
In 1926, Sammy was selected to serve as acting head of the Division of Forestry, while Professor Mulford was in Europe on sabbatical leave. When the Forestry Di- vision won Department status, Sammy was put in charge of the first graduate conference or seminar course. This led to another first, namely, as a member of the committee to approve the first Ph.D. in forestry.
Research on California Rangelands
Along with his devotion to teaching and his constant interest in the individual student, Sammy maintained, in his first decade at Berkeley, a surprisingly high level of research production. He brought to Berkeley a wealth of information on range management and ecology, which he promptly assembled into three major textbooks. The first, Range and Pusture Management, was published in 1923; the second Native American Forage Plants, in 1924; and the third, Livestock Husbandry on Range and Pas- ture, in 1928. The three texts, each of over 400 pages, constituted the most authoritative and useful books written on range management. They were a boon to students and practitioners, and certainly enhanced the prestige of the Division of Forestry.
Sammy was not content with these early laurels; with characteristic zeal, he quickly launched a new pro- gram of research. He initiated studies on the complex association of annual grasses and forbs in California- many of which were introduced during the mission days from the Mediterranean area. He also began research on the ecology and management of brushlands (often referred to as chaparral). Brushland management prob- lems provided Sampson a fertile field for research on such matters as reaction of native shrubs to fire, water- shed protection, conversion to grassland, and relation to wildlife and commercial forests. Discussion of his findings with concerned professional and lay groups, and publication of current results not only enhanced his professional stature; but of greater importance, they stimulated interest and support for initiating a sound research program, including expanded graduate studies in the Forestry Division,
SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST 349
Teaching and Research af the University
(19334950)
HUDSON G. REYNOLDS
Principal Wildlife Biologist, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S.D.A., Tempe, Arizona.
Dr. Sampson amplified his prowess as a scholar, scientist, and educator during his mid-period at the University of California. By this time, range manage- ment problems in need of solution had matured in his
mind. The problems that he considered worthy of intense research included: (1) carbohydrate assimila- tion and storage in relation to the developmental growth cycle of forage plants-particularly the regenerative spring growth period; (2) relative nutritional values of forage plants as a basis for better estimates of grazing capacity; (3) factors affecting palatability of forage plants; (4) effect of fire on: physical and chemical soil properties, soil nitrification, soil microflora and fauna, water regime (e.g. percolation and runoff) and rate of soil rebuilding in relation to the ecology and physiology of plant succession; (5) economic principles determining multiple use possibilities of range lands; (6) edaphic requirements and life-history characteristics of plants poisonous to livestock as a basis for developing control programs; (7) the relation of intensity of grazing to maintenance of a soil protective plant cover, the relative erosivity of soils in the different climatic regions, and how eroding areas might be reseeded and restored; and (8) area1 and forage conflicts between game and live- stock.
Some Research Results
Dr. Sampson contrfbuted some knowledge to nearly every facet of his statement of range management prob- lems. A few highlights of some of his findings are il- lustrative.
He was particularly concerned about the inconsisten- cies in, the general trends in the mineral constituents and organic contents of forage plants with advancement of the growing season. By collecting his materials at phenological growth stages instead of chronological dates he was able to demonstrate an orderly decline in the crude protein, silica-free ash, calcium, phosphorus, and potassium from the earliest appearance of leaf blades to plant maturity; and an increase in percent of crude fiber in most grasses, grass-like and broad-leaved forage plants.
From intensive studies he found that undisturbed chaparral of northern California effectively protected the soil against serious erosion. The unfavorable effects of soil erosion from burning of such plant cover were found to vary with weather conditions, character of vegetation, kind of soil and topography, and the degree of grazing and trampling. Moreover, he demonstrated that the slight quantitative superiority of soil moisture values on freshly burned sites was of little ecological significance or economic importance.
Chaparral range improvement.-A final comprehen- sive ecological report of California chaparral studies was published in 1944. Am o n g the conclusions he
reached were : (1) Sprouting forms of chaparral are not killed by a single hot fire, but nonsprouting forms may be eliminated. (2) Forage increases from burning any chaparral are only temporary. In sprouting chaparral, increase in herbaceous growth practically disappears by about the fifth year; in areas of nonsprouting brush, forage increase lasts somewhat longer. (3) Attempts to improve grazing capacity of chaparral lands by burning should be confined to fairly level topography and deep productive soils and should be followed by conservative systems of grazing management.
Particularly frustrating to Dr. Sampson were his in- vestigations in dendrochronology. In fact, he considered the e n t i r e discipline an “enigma.” He courageously stated his case as follows:
“Although tree-ring studies are interesting and may be limitedly useful in some studies, the claims of preperiod climatic interpretations are thus far un- reliable, and, on the whole, unscientific.”
A symposium of scientists, called by him in 1941 to discuss the subject largely confirmed his opinion.
Testimonial to Dr. Sampson’s scholarship were major compilations on stock poisoning plants of California-a review of 116 publications on the subject; and the status of plant indicators- a compilation of 142 publications- in which he concluded that communities of plants are more reliable indicators than are individual species.
As an Educator
During the Depression years, students became much interested in job opportunities in the forestry profes- sion. As a result, classes at the University of California were large. Sammy carried a heavy load during this period, teaching courses in forest ecology, and elemen- tary and advanced range management; in addition, he conducted graduate seminars in forest ecology and range management. All of these classes were taught during one semester so that the alternate semester could be devoted entirely to research.
Sammy worked hard at teaching. He prepared care- fully for every lecture, burning much “midnight oil.” He expected his students to work as hard at learning as he did at teaching. Reading assignments were used liberally to amplify classroom presentations, and to en- courage familiarity with scientific literature. If students learned little from his classes, it was their fault, not Sammy’s !
His counseling of graduate students instilled his own intense scientific curiosity and research personality in them. As expressed by one student:
“I will always treasure my association with Sam- my. I consider myself among those fortunate enough to have sensed something of his spirit. What he taught me is insignificant beside the inspiration he provided to me. The will to do, to try, to never be satisfied with accomplishments of today, but always to seek to do better on the morrow is something that only comes from proper association. Sammy gave me this. For the gift, I will always be grateful.”
His Educational Philosophy
350 SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST
range manager should be trained in several disciplines rather than a narrow specialty. His broad concept of a range management education is suggested by the sub- jects that he recommended for a curriculum, to wit: English, chemistry, mathematics, physics, geology, soils, botany, genetics, economics, zoology, engineering, so- ciology, philosophy, agronomy, and animal husbandry, besides range management and forestry. He contended that a sound scientific background would be more help- ful to a student in future years than specialization in a narrow subject field. His statement of education was:
“ . . . a primary mission of a college education is to train students to think. The ability to think may best be acquired by a combination of formal training in philosophy and logic, with a goodly sprinkling of technical courses.”
Sammy believed deeply in the education of youth. He was concerned that few schools in the United States below the collegiate level offered a formal course in the conservation of renewable land resources. He believed that failure to educate youth properly was a real ob- stacle to improved range land use. He thought that the teaching of conservation of rangelands should begin with 4-H and similar agricultural clubs in elementary and high schools and should culminate at the university level.
Dr. Sampson believed sincerely in scholarly pursuits. He was a member and loyal supporter of several honor- ary fraternities. Among these honoraries were: Phi Beta Kappa (liberal arts), Sigma Xi (scientific), Xi Sigma Pi (forestry), and Alpha Zeta (agriculture).
He was a strong believer in “salesmanship” of range management. He thought that range workers-particu- larly researchers- should be able to disseminate their findings clearly in the spoken and written word, to both lay and scientific audiences, and in both technical and popular style.
He insisted upon simplicity of expression whether in speaking or writing. To be able to speak and write easily and effectively was to him the mark of an edu- cated man. His publications, expressed in a simple, direct and concise manner, are evidence that he took his own advice to heart.
Professor Emeriius Years (1951-1967)
DONALD R. CORNELIUS AND HAROLD H. BISWELL
Range Scientist, Agricultural Research Service, U.S.D.A., and Professor of Forestry, University of California, Berkeley.
Dr. Sampson’s students and followers have carried the information, ideals, and principals of ecology and better range management throughout the United States and around the world in their responsibilities at many different universities, governmental agencies, and pri- vate enterprises. Many of his former students and others continued through his retirement years to correspond with and, if possible, to visit with him to obtain addi- tional information as they encountered problems in their respective professional careers.
The improvement of range education became of
great concern to him as the subject developed in more colleges and universities. In 1951 he surveyed the higher institutions offering courses in range manage- ment and reported on the educational status of the subject. A few years later he brought the survey up to date reporting on range management courses, curricu- lum requirements, and number of students at various institutions.
Research Contributions
Dr. Sampson continued to publish during professor emeritus years. These publications were highlighted by a comprehensive treatment of the California grasslands and range grasses in 1951 and of California range brush- lands and browse plants in 1963. Much of California’s range flora received ecologic and taxonomic treatment in these two publications. Both publications are widely used and highly valued as reference manuals.
His last textbook on range management was trans- lated into several foreign languages including Spanish, Korean and Serbo-Croation. The English edition re- ceived world-wide distribution, brought him interna- tional recognition, and led to his participation in several international conferences and publications.
Naiional and Iniernational Affairs
In 1948 he presented a paper on fire-forage relations at the Inter American Conference on Conservation of Renewable Natural Resources at Denver, Colorado. In 1949, at the United Nations Scientific Conference on the Conservation and Utilization of Resources, Lake Success, New York, he reviewed the application of ecological principals in determining condition of grazing lands. At the VI International Grasslands Congress at Penn- sylvania State College in August 1952, he presented a paper and was vice-chairman of a section.
Dr. Sampson had considerable correspondence with international scientists. Many foreign students made special effort to take his courses. He accepted an over- seas assignment in August 1952 to review experimental range for the University of Hawaii on the five largest islands; he lectured at the University of Hawaii and to livestock organizations on the various islands.
He held membership on the steering committee for the Mid-Century Conference on Resources for the Fu- ture of the Ford Foundation and helped plan the na- tional meeting of that organization in 1952.
He accepted assignments with several federal agen- cies to study range conditions. The U.S. Forest Service appointed him in August 1955 to work with the Port- land, Oregon office to rechart and rephotograph subal- pine grassland plots established by him in 1908 in the Wallawa area.
He served as Consultant to the Bureau of Reclama- tion in determining the influence of construction of a dam on water relations in grazing lands nearby. He presented his suggestions for management of southern California brush watersheds at a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee.
Honors
r
---
-_
SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST 351
of America awarded him “Eminent Ecologist” in 1958. The American Forestry Association presented the 1958 Conservation award in the field of education to him “as the founder of the first school of range management in the world.”
He was elected to the Board of Directors of the American Society of Range Management from 1949 through 1951.? This Society awarded him a Certificate of Merit in 1957 commemorating more than 40 years of teaching, encouraging, and leading all citizens in- terested in the preservation and full production of the range resource of the United States.
The Society of American Foresters elected Dr. Samp- son a fellow in 1959 in recognition of outstanding achievements in Forestry, The University of California Alumni Foresters elected him to honorary life member- ship for outstanding service in the field of forestry. Also, the University of Nebraska honored him with the Distinguished Service award.
Chronological
Bibliography
HUDSON G. REYNOLDSDr. A. W. Sampson produced much scientific litera- ture in the disciplines of plant ecology and range man- agement. Scarcely a facet of rangeland science escaped his attention. Moreover, he popularized his research by publishing in lay journals. The experience of nearly 50 years of research and teaching was compiled in his last of four books, Range Management-Principles and Practices. This tremendous outpouring of investigations, analyses, and compilations should provide inspiration to all people with a desire to learn of the enlightened management of rangelands-based on sound physiologi- cal and ecological principles.
Publication Titles
1908. The revegetation of overgrazed range areas. Prelim. Rep. U.S. Forest Serv., Circ. 148. 21 p. 1909. Natural revegetation of depleted mountain graz-
ing lands. Progr. Rep. U.S. Forest Serv., Circ. 169. 28 p.
Influence of physical factors on transpiration. Minn. Bot. Studies 4:$3-519. (with L. M. Allen)
1910. Burning hay meadows and pasture lands. Breed- er’s Gaz. 58:352.
1911. Concerning forest fires. Breeder’s Gaz. 60:429-430. 1912. The relation of soil acidity to plant societies. Sot.
Amer. For. Proc. 7:51-57.
1913. Collection and sowing of alfilaria seed (Erodium cicutarium) in Sequoia National Forest. U.S. Forest Serv. Invest. 2:14-17.
Range improvement by deferred and rotation grazing. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 34:5-16.
The reseeding of depleted grazing lands to cultivated forage plants. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 4:2-34.
Scientific range management. Natl. Wool Grower 3(12):7-9.
Relation of grazing to timber reproduction, Shasta National Forest. U.S. Dep. Agr., Forest Serv. Invest. 2:18-24. (with W. A. Dayton)
1914. Distribution and function of range plants. Natl. Wool Grower 4(12):20-23.
Natural revegetation of range lands based upon growth requirements and life history of the vegeta- tion. J. Agr. Res. 3:93-147.
1915. The quadrat method as applied to investigations in forestry. Nebr. Univ., Forest Club Ann. 6:11-31. Range grasses. Natl. Wool Grower 5(12):15-18. 1916. Range grasses. Natl. Wool Grower 6(2):15-17.
Bluegrasses with a discussion of chemical analysis. Natl. Wool Grower 6( 10):23-25.
The brome grasses. Natl. Wool Grower 6(3):38-40. The fescue grasses. Natl. Wool Grower 6(7):17-19. The grama grasses. Natl. Wool Grower 6(9) :27, 28, 35. Poisonous range plants. Natl. Wool Grower 6(12):
25-27.
Porcupine grass and head’s grass or redtop. Natl. Wool Grower 6(4):19-21.
The reed grasses and their relatives. Natl. Wool Grower 6(5):19-21.
1917. Important range plants: their life history and forage value. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 545. 63 p. Succession as a factor in range management. J. For.
15:593-596.
1918. Climate and plant growth in certain vegetative associations. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 700. 72 p. The Great Basin Experiment Station. Natl. Wool
Grower 8(4):19-21.
Range preservation and its relation to erosion control on western range lands. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 675. 35 p. (with L. H. Weyl)
1919. Effect of grazing upon aspen reproduction. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 741. 29 p.
Plant succession in relation to range management. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 791. 76 p.
Suggestions for instruction in range management. J. For. 17:523-545.
1920. Bringing back over-grazed range. Natl. Wool Grower 10(4):11-14.
Herding hints from the changing range. Natl. Wool Grower 10(5):21-22.
I_921. Reseeding the range, Natl. Wool Grower ll(3): &1,3.
1923. Fir+ $$ a destroyer of grasslands. Breeder’s Gaz. 84:293-294.. ’
Natural revegetation and maintenance of foothill ranges. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Ann. Rep. p. 143-144. Our native broad-leaved forage plants. Natl. WooI
Grower 13(5$:17-19; (6):15-17; (7):25-28; (9):28-31. Range and pasture management. John Wiley & Sonsr
Inc., N.Y. 421 p.
1924. An 800-mile range reseeding plan. Natl. Wool Grower 14(5):19-21.
Native American forage plants. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., N.Y. 435 p.
Our grazing lands. Calif. Countryman 10(2):5-6. 1925. Comparative profits from early spring lambs and
from lambs marketed in autumn. Natl. Wool Grower 15(9):28-30.
The foothill-montane-alpine flora and its environment. U.S. Nat. Mus., Contrib. U.S. Nat. Herbarium 25:24- 31.
352 SAMPSON-RANGE SCIENTIST
1926. Grazing vs. forestry. J. For. 24:278-411. (with for future research. J. For. 40:614-620. (with W. S.
H. H. Chapman and H. Schmitz) Glock)
Grazing, recreation and game in the forests. Calif. Other studies in the program of the San Joaquin Countryman 12(6):5, 27-28. experimental range. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. Grazing periods and forage production on the national 663:136-142.
forests. U.S. Dep. Agr. Bull. 1405. 54 p. (with H. E. 1943. Chaparral crown sprouts as browse for deer. J.
Malmsten) Wildl. Manage. 7:119-122. (with H. G. Reynolds)
1927. Improving cattle ranges in the west. West. Cattle 1944. Effect of chaparral burning on soil erosion and on Markets and News 1:7-8, 26-29. soil-moisture relations. Ecology 25:179-191.
Range grasses of California. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. Plant succession on burned chaparral lands in north- 430. 94 p. (with A. Chase) ern California. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 685. 144 P. 1928. Livestock husbandry on range and pasture. John 1948. The use of fire in range forage production. US.
Wiley & Sons, Inc., N.Y. 411 p. State Dep. Pub. 3382:548-558.
The range types of California. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. The range in California. U.S. Dep. Agr. Yrbk. p. 575-
Bull. 461:33-40. 582. (with M. W. Talbot)
Early development of the livestock industry in the Burn that brush and increase forage yields. West. United States. Calif. Countryman 14(5) :8, 19. Livestock J. 26(49):54-56. (with H. G. Reynolds) 1929. Forage production and soil preservation. West. 1949. Application of ecological principles in determin-
Cattle Markets and News 3(49):15, 41-42. ing condition of grazing lands. U.N. Sci. Conf. Cons. 1930. Influence of leafage removal on anatomical struc- Util. Res. Proc. 6:509-514.
ture of roots of Stipa pulchra and Bromus hordea- 1951. Range management education. J. For. 49:507-510. cells. Plant Physiol. 5:543-553. (with K. W. Parker) A symposium on rotation grazing in North America. Basic research in forestry. Calif. Countryman 16(7): J. Range Manage. 4:19-24.
19,29. California grasslands and range forage grasses. Calif.
The carbohydrate metabolism of Stipa pulchra. Hil- Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 724. 131 p. (with A. Chase and gardia 5:61-100. (with E. C. McCarty) D. W. Hedrick)
St. Johnswort on range lands of California. Calif. Range management-principles and practices. John Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 503. 48 p. (with K. W. Parker) Wiley & Sons, Inc., N.Y. 570 p.
1930. Yield and water utilization of vegetation grown 1954. The education of range managers. J. Range on different soil horizons. In: Conf. Res. Prob. in Manage. 7:207-212.
Consumptive Use of Water, Los Angeles, Paper I. Costs and returns of controlled brush burning for
4 P. range improvement in northern California. Calif.
1931. Growth and yield of certain Gramineae as influ- Div. For. Imp. Studies 1:7-41. (with L. T. Burcham) enced by reduction of photosynthetic tissue. Hil- Costs of controlled burning. Calif. Agr. 8(9):8, 9, 15. gardia 5:361-381. (with K. W. Parker) (with L. T. Burcham)
The public domain in a national challenge. West. Forage composition and yield. Calif. Agr. 8(10):12-13. Cattle Markets and News 5(49): 6, 8, 27-28. (with L. T. Burcham)
Relation of erosion to soil productivity. Agr. Eng. 1955. Grazing systems: they have definite effects on
12(4): 3 p. forage and meat production. West. Livestock J.
Establishment and succession of vegetation of differ- 33(8):44-45, 114-116.
ent soil horizons. Hilgardia 5:155-173. (with J. D. 1955. Where have we been and where are we going in
Sinclair) range management. J. Range Manage. 8:241-246.
1935. Stock poisoning plants of California. Calif. Agr. 1956. Control of brush and undesirable trees. Unasylva Exp. Sta. Bull. 593. 90 p. (with H. E. Malmsten) 10:19-29, 117-129, 166-182. (with A. M. Schultz)
(Rev. 1942) The retirement of Dean Frederick Storrs Baker. Calif.
Growth and seasonal changes in composition of oak For. 16(4):5-6.
leaves. Plant Physiol. 10:739-751. (with R. Samisch) 1957. Range management as a profession. Timber 1:22. 1936. Experiment in correlation of tree-growth rings Suggestions for revision of terminology dealing with
and precipitation cycles. Amer. Geophys. Union fire. J. For. 55:219.
Trans. 17:493-496. (with W. E. Davis) Control of brush and undesirable trees. Unasylva Research problems pertinent to better range manage- 11:19-25.
ment. Mich. For. 17:10-16. 1959. California brushlands-their characteristics and 1939. Composition of common California foothill plants utility. Sot. Amer. For. Proc. 54:173-180.
as a factor in range management. Calif. Agr. Exp. 1961. Some suggestions for management of southern Sta. Bull. 627. 95 p. (with A. Gordon) California brush watersheds. Calif. Div. For. 22 p. Plant indicators-concept and status. Bot. Rev. 3: A critique of a philosophy of range land use. J.
155-206. Range Manage. 16:287-290. (with L. T. Burcham)
1940. The dendrochronology enigma. J. For. 38:966-968. 1963. California range brushlands and browse plants. 1942. Tree growth and the environmental complex: a Calif. Ext. Serv. Manual 33. 162 p. (with B. S.
Rangelands-Challenge
to ithe Nation1
JAMES H. JENSENPresident, Oregon State University, Cowallis, and President, National Association State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges.
Highlight
Rangeland is nominafed as ihe leasf understood nafural resource. Underlined is the imporfance of hu- man effori in fhe various work fields and fhe rights of individuals and publics. Conclusion is a five poinf summary of challenges ahead for rangeland management.
One of the purposes of a uni- versity is to stimulate and to as- sist in the development of soci- ety’s intellectual resources and natural resources . . . to serve in
a sense as a guardian, a devel- oper, and an exploiter of these resources. And first and fore- most, it is the task of a univer- sity to teach and to train. The subject of rangelands represents an excellent meeting ground for discussion of all of these inter- ests.
All universities, and especially Land-Grant institutions, as they have developed their instruc- tional, research, and extension service programs, have been acutely aware of the increasing- ly important part all of our na- tural resources are playing in our modern life. They are equally aware, particularly in the West, of their special re- sponsibilities toward conserva- tion and management and regu- lation of our natural resources and of the difficulties of making the public aware of these com- plex relationships.
The natural resources of our nation that need greater under- standing and attention include water, soil, wildlife, petroleum, minerals, and forests. But for
1 Excerpts from a paper presented at Annual Meeting, American Society of
Range Management,
Seattle,
Washington,
February 16, 1967.one of the least understood na- tural resources of all, I nominate the vast rangelands of the West.
The rangeland and livestock industry of the West has been a challenge that has tradition- ally captured the imagination of the American people. There has always been a degree of roman- ticism in the West. It would ap- pear, however, that that era is about over. Rangeland users, the livestock industry, and the peo- ple of the West, are now con- fronted with a need for greater development and full produc- tion to fulfill the rapidly ex- panding food requirements of this nation and of the world.
We are seeing new frontiers developing in America nearly every day. There are numerous evidences of these new frontiers
. . . in space, in engineering, in
medicine, in various fields of science and communications. Im- proved utilization and better de- velopment and management of our rangelands is another great and vital frontier.
But the traditional cowboy, who for so many generations has been a colorful symbol of west- ern rangelands, is likely to have a secondary role in this new, vast drama that is unfolding as one of the major challenges of the rangeland industry for the next 20 years. The cowboy could very well be replaced by a team operation . . . by the scientist,
the economist, the manager, and all the range users working to- gether to improve efficiency and greater production demanded by an expanding population. There is no reason to believe this team operation will be any less dra- matic, and certainly no less pro- ductive, than the leading men in the cowboy era.
Leaders
in the fields of range
and
related
resource
manage-
ment recognize
the lack of ade-
quate understanding
of their op-
erations
and their problems
by
the public.
The rapport between
353
professional range managers and range users, in many cases, has admittedly left much to be de- sired.
We can make a good case for improvement of this mutual un- derstanding between manage- ment and users, or others in- volved, by full utilization of a movement that has been proven successful for more than a cen- tury of trial and test. This refers to the Land-Grant College sys- tem which had its beginnings with the Morrill Act signed by President Lincoln in 1862. This system of resident instruction, research, and service is available to improve and generate better understanding among all ele- ments in range management at local and statewide levels.
Research, a key to better un- derstanding and continued de- velopment of material resources, may be conducted along local, state, or even regional levels. Many range types and land use patterns exist independently of state lines. They can be and are being worked on from a regional basis. But regional problems in general are usually of such a nature that solutions may need local interpretation.
This is where colleges and uni- versities definitely come into view. It seems almost unbeliev- able how often these institutions of higher learning are over- looked in research, service, edu- cation, and information they can and will offer to natural resource leaders at all levels.
As indicated previously, the rangelands of today have made many specific contributions in wealth, recreation, and happi- ness to this nation. But what of tomorrow . . . the next 20 years?
354
nical, scientific, and social de- velopments even in the next two decades may revolutionize and alter our way of life-just as they have in the past two dec- ades.
The most impressive feature of range management consid- ered by this conference probably revolves around the idea of how rangelands can be made the most productive and the most useful; how they can be utilized to the very maximum for recreation and wildlife and in providing tangible substance to the Ameri- can worldwide campaign against hunger.
A few of the challenges ahead, in summary, can be identified as follows:
1.
2.
3.
To place rangelands in their proper perspective in rela- tion to other resources so they can make a maximum contribution to all segments of humanity.
To develop adequate and appropriate laws at all lev- els of government, and ad- minister rangelands to keep them a producing part of the national economy. To recognize ourselves, and
Rangelands-Challenge
io the Mind1
WYNNE THORNE
Vice President for Research, Utah
State University, Logan.
Highlight
The challenge fo the range man- ager and scientist is fo seek the greafesi possible insights and under- standing of range resources; then fo evaluaie and systematize information about these lands so their use can be integrated info local, siafe, and na- tional goals. Our challenge comes from each oiher and from fhe needs of society.
1 Paper presented at Annual Meet- ing, American Society of Range Management, Seattle, Washington, February 16, 1967.
JENSEN
to be certain the general public realizes, the impor- tance of the range livestock industry to the economy of the West and to the diet of the American people. To see the relationships be- tween public and private land. To use these private lands efficiently and effec- tively in complementary conjunction with the vast holdings of public lands. To understand fully the range resource: to know its productivity, past, present, and future; to plan soundly for various uses of the rangelands; for forage, wa- ter, mineral, and wildlife production, recreation, and to utilize research, educa- tion, and communication to the maximum.
Above, sketched with broad strokes, is a description of some of our principal problems in rangeland utilization, plus allu- sions to some of the great lacks of public understanding of rangelands, even as the people from urban areas very common- ly lack an understanding of ag- riculture in general. These two
In the 1840’s the fledgling na- tion in eastern United States was facing a perplexing decision as to whether to expand westward or to consolidate and develop an already extensive and sparsely settled land. While President Polk was framing the goals for his administration, a small group of literary utopians near Boston, known as Brook Farmers, coined the phrase “Manifest Destiny,” and rationalized that though the process violated their principles, they considered the extension of civilization westward the edict of Divine Providence. The phrase caught the imagination of the public, and nurtured the
broad areas of concern form the genesis of a challenge-the chal- lenge of the future for America and for that matter for the world, to create and develop much more understanding.
Such understandings involve more than a sympathetic atti- tude, important as that may be. This needed understanding has much to do with a recognition of the important interdepen- dence of human effort in the various work fields and the rights of individuals and the rights of publics. There is also the added need for an under- standing of education, for con- tinuous research and public ser- vice, and the need for resources for their support. In high pri- ority is the need for even more dedicated men and women to be enlisted in work of inspired teaching and research. By what- ever route we examine the chal- lenges of the future-be they the problems of rangelands or any other concern-as a nation and as a world our success will de- pend upon unselfish, courageous, determined, and most of all upon enlightened efforts.
popular concept that westward expansion was God’s will, and that the hardy trappers, prospec- tors, and pioneers, even in their often vicious subjugation of In- dians and nature, were in some way fulfilling the dictates of God.
354
nical, scientific, and social de- velopments even in the next two decades may revolutionize and alter our way of life-just as they have in the past two dec- ades.
The most impressive feature of range management consid- ered by this conference probably revolves around the idea of how rangelands can be made the most productive and the most useful; how they can be utilized to the very maximum for recreation and wildlife and in providing tangible substance to the Ameri- can worldwide campaign against hunger.
A few of the challenges ahead, in summary, can be identified as follows:
1.
2.
3.
To place rangelands in their proper perspective in rela- tion to other resources so they can make a maximum contribution to all segments of humanity.
To develop adequate and appropriate laws at all lev- els of government, and ad- minister rangelands to keep them a producing part of the national economy. To recognize ourselves, and
Rangelands-Challenge
io the Mind1
WYNNE THORNE
Vice President for Research, Utah
State University, Logan.
Highlight
The challenge fo the range man- ager and scientist is fo seek the greafesi possible insights and under- standing of range resources; then fo evaluaie and systematize information about these lands so their use can be integrated info local, siafe, and na- tional goals. Our challenge comes from each oiher and from fhe needs of society.
1 Paper presented at Annual Meet- ing, American Society of Range Management, Seattle, Washington, February 16, 1967.
JENSEN
to be certain the general public realizes, the impor- tance of the range livestock industry to the economy of the West and to the diet of the American people. To see the relationships be- tween public and private land. To use these private lands efficiently and effec- tively in complementary conjunction with the vast holdings of public lands. To understand fully the range resource: to know its productivity, past, present, and future; to plan soundly for various uses of the rangelands; for forage, wa- ter, mineral, and wildlife production, recreation, and to utilize research, educa- tion, and communication to the maximum.
Above, sketched with broad strokes, is a description of some of our principal problems in rangeland utilization, plus allu- sions to some of the great lacks of public understanding of rangelands, even as the people from urban areas very common- ly lack an understanding of ag- riculture in general. These two
In the 1840’s the fledgling na- tion in eastern United States was facing a perplexing decision as to whether to expand westward or to consolidate and develop an already extensive and sparsely settled land. While President Polk was framing the goals for his administration, a small group of literary utopians near Boston, known as Brook Farmers, coined the phrase “Manifest Destiny,” and rationalized that though the process violated their principles, they considered the extension of civilization westward the edict of Divine Providence. The phrase caught the imagination of the public, and nurtured the
broad areas of concern form the genesis of a challenge-the chal- lenge of the future for America and for that matter for the world, to create and develop much more understanding.
Such understandings involve more than a sympathetic atti- tude, important as that may be. This needed understanding has much to do with a recognition of the important interdepen- dence of human effort in the various work fields and the rights of individuals and the rights of publics. There is also the added need for an under- standing of education, for con- tinuous research and public ser- vice, and the need for resources for their support. In high pri- ority is the need for even more dedicated men and women to be enlisted in work of inspired teaching and research. By what- ever route we examine the chal- lenges of the future-be they the problems of rangelands or any other concern-as a nation and as a world our success will de- pend upon unselfish, courageous, determined, and most of all upon enlightened efforts.
popular concept that westward expansion was God’s will, and that the hardy trappers, prospec- tors, and pioneers, even in their often vicious subjugation of In- dians and nature, were in some way fulfilling the dictates of God.
