Creating a Northern Agriculture - Alaska Agricultural …alaskaagresources.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/burton... · · 2011-10-25Creating a Northern Agriculture III, DEFINING PARAMETERS

Creating a Northern AgricultureIII, DEFINING PARAMETERS OF AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL

IN ALASKAWayne E, Burton

University of Alaska Institute of Agricultural Sciences Bulletin 44

• i f-f <rt it ft*-jranimr*' "ihrrrriri '«BE2aito»*2Yi r*!« r*s*--tf#' ^^JLAjw^jfcKfc^htt^^rfrJkiw-ifcA^ra 'JJV*"ta_ ••tftjLif_^ri-^r_j'LJ-l_LTifi-lltJPiit^L r_-fir_r • i;_rt_iM L'jLLtT-j_T_-»T1 *f:

tSGRie

K.V-*., JiL*Ak_ sJk*JbiaitilhSBciM **^*fef-^â#-arfA fr Jfti .iirMff-i.i-*»mv*«.tfraii; MlnTi MiiifTririfTfTPilirfift* im n>> IB»H iiilff?Tii«iii w A*whMn>*Ki£u«<olur »aK•B-o-ajs^wfet><(tif i«***»&Mj-*w*i -« -«vaV£V^^^«-*icii i, (*«iAM£Ve»»un . ' lK&ir u'*fc*,*«fe«»-*»**'*i-,ft«i*j

rr1»1l)rw6WWâ^^wi'*r%?T(y»7WMP««»^^^ * f 9*W5jii«! 7V. wa^ i«^vip^ j«ftS^sri»^ f^sfr*jTA«it^{theseirepprt^SitraijTectTattentioimc^pportumtie^ST. mnrjWNW»M»7««vv . vpwavvW^developmentmofi^^prthernmgricultureWind&^^â**, . ^ . k«»-»^«ajj «—, -jHL-*^T.. »«-k --«afc- ot w* -™™. . v -* ^w;i$S^ ^

'^landps^ndfcQntrollplanningi__ _ _ .jEssssessassassK^^

^process:

fKi&WRK*P*-i*»«*•»«?"««*•>•'«W»Fi|WdQ.^?*5aS!T*>Jr'^s*l^jtlW"3**

^^^

j aKJStt M. J UL ,*-' «a J J^>^*^^*i ^ i *^^ t£rj&*-»f*^^^ *rti, , .Vc - i.r.-tft risrKaF -»%^S>«fe^& .m'jt«ft«*rtU« .i.-p raBBMrrt x Jwwi-^Jbtf ^w*

iîntendgdTnoMii

CREATING A NORTHERN AGRICULTURE

III, DEFINING PARAMETERS OF AGRICULTURAL POTENTIALIN ALASKA

Wayne E. BurtonAgricultural Economist

UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA

Institute of Agricultural SciencesFairbanks, Alaska 99701

Bulletin 44August 1975

CONTENTS

pageIntroduction . . , . , , . , . . . . , . . . , . 1Supply of Agricultural Land 2Use of Agricultural Lands . . , , , , , , , . 5Agricultural Production , , . , . , , . , , . , 5

Livestock and Poultry Numbers 5Farm Value of Agricultural Production 7

Other Resources Used in Agricultural Production . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Labor 7Fertilizer . 7Petroleum Fuels 11Electricity 18

Factor Input Costs for Farm Production , . . . . 18Farm Machinery and Equipment 19

Capital Investment in Farm Production Sector .19Distribution of Latent Agricultural Production 19Summary and Conclusions 22References 24Appendix 25

List of Tables

page

Table 1. Estimated Agricultural Lands Available for CropsIncluded in the Study 4

Table 2, Estimated Uses of Identified Agricultural Lands,by Region . , . . , . . . , . . . , , . , . , . . 6

Table 3, Estimated Latent Agricultural Production,by Region 8

Table 4. Estimated Livestock and Poultry Numbers toAccomplish Latent Agricultural ProductionPossibilities in Alaska, by Region 9

Table 5. Estimated Annual Value of Crop Production onLatent Agricultural Lands, by Region 10

Table 6. Estimated Man-Years of Labor Required toAccomplish Latent Agricultural Productionin Alaska, by Region , 12

Table 7. Estimated Crop Fertilizer Requirements forLatent Agricultural Lands, by Region 13

Table 8. Estimated Diesel Fuel Use for Latent AgriculturalProduction (on Farm), by Region 14

n

Table 9. Estimated Gasoline Fuel Use for Latent AgriculturalProduction (on Farm), by Region , 15

Table 10, Estimated L-P Gas Use For Latent AgriculturalProduction (on Farm), by Region , , , , , , . . . . 16

Table 11. Estimated Electricity Use for Latent AgriculturalProduction (on Farm), by Region , , , , 17

Table 12, Estimated Capitalization for Alaska's LatentFarming Regions , 20

Table 13, Estimated Distribution of Latent AgriculturalProduction from Identified Lands in Alaska , , , , 21

List of Figures

Figure 1, Agricultural Regions of Alaska 3

ill

III. DEFINING PARAMETERS OF AGRICULTURAL POTENTIALIN ALASKA

Wayne E. Burton

stln the long run, we hit only what we aim at. "... Thoreau.

Introduction

Alaska's current land-use planning is characterized by a particular voidin providing for future agricultural development. One reason for this void inplanning has been a profound lack in identification of productionpossibilities in most areas of the state. While the report, ALASKA'SAGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL (4), generally identified some 16 millionacres suitable for tillage, and millions of acres suitable for livestock grazing,it did not provide other than a cursory review of product types which mightbe grown in Alaska. Further, it did not identify probable locations whereparticular crops and livestock would be produced, nor possible scope andmagnitude of such industry development.

Public apathy regarding agriculture in Alaska will continue until suchtime as potential production parameters are established and recognized.Present negativistic images of agricultural possibilities in Alaska continue tobe rationalized in terms of a miniscule, fragmented, and declining industrythat now exists. Any extensive attempt to plan for agricultural developmentin Alaska will not only suffer innocuous assessments of agriculturalpossibilities but will be in competition, if not open conflict, with publicplanning for parks, wildlife refuges, ecological reserves, scenic and historicsites, public forests, petroleum and mineral provinces, and those landsidentified for other real or conceived public uses (9), Moreover, this situationcannot be ethically resolved without informed and objective assessment ofAlaska's latent agricultural production possibilities.

The present public planning for renewable and other resource-basedindustries in Alaska does not reflect the reality of long-run industrydevelopment possibilities. The fish and shellfish industry (5) has beenexpanded to near capacity in most areas, with returns to domestic fishermenbeing less than $100 million and the wholesale value of processed fish beingless than $200 million in most years. The Alaska forest products industry(5), after a period of very rapid growth, has stabilized at an employmentlevel of less than 1,200 workers and a wholesale product value of not morethan $100 million. While the fisheries industry appears to have littleprobability of significant expansion for domestic fishermen, the forestproducts industry appears at some future date to have the probability ofdoubling in size before reaching sustained harvest capacity.

Other resource-based industries such as recreation and minerals(excluding petroleum) receive a great deal more attention than agriculture inpresent land-use planning (9, 10). While tourism expenditures in Alaska are

estimated to approach $50 million (5), typical optimistic projections havelittle probability of being realized since they have been based on trendsestablished in a brief period of very rapid industry growth when personaldisposable incomes were very high throughout the nation and the world.Also, Alaska's $50 million mineral industry, even by the most optimisticprojections, is not anticipated to substantially expand during the foreseeablefuture (5, 9, 11). Even though tourism and mining are both labor intensive,and highly seasonal, neither is anticipated to provide significant net additionsto permanent employment in a relevant planning period.

In contrast, the agricultural industry appears to have definitepossibilities for expanding from the present 600 workers, and a farm productvalue of $5,5 million (2), to more than 55,000 workers and a farm productvalue in excess of $4,0 billion per year, if serious attention is directed to itsdevelopment. Expansion possibilities have been identified from the followingconsiderations.

Supply of Agricultural Land

Alaska's agricultural lands are not yet fully identified, Estimates oflatent agricultural lands, in various regions of the state, (Figure 1.) hinge ondata available from the U. S. Department of Agriculture — Soil ConservationService (SCS) and the Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission forAlaska, While the available data (Table 1) are of exploratory grade, in mostinstances, they do reflect some 30 years of soils identification work withinthe state (4).

The first comprehensive investigation of soils in Alaska was made in1946, and published in 1951. Detailed surveys have been made in the TananaValley, the Cook Inlet-Susitna Lowland, Kodiak Island, and a number ofsmall areas elsewhere in the state. The statewide Exploratory Soil Survey ofAlaska was initiated in 1967 by the SCS and was completed in 1973. Theresulting mapping (4) shows only those areas with significant portions of thesoils classed as suitable for farm tillage. Some areas considered marginallysuitable for tillage, with present crops and states of technology, have beendeleted, Small areas, and those with lesser portions of tillable lands, have notbeen identified.

Even though extensive acreages of latent agricultural lands have beenidentified in several regions of the state, only small acreages can be classed asmature agricultural soils. Most of the latent agricultural land has not beencleared, and is morphologically immature when initially prepared for tillage.Since the soils maturation process in this northern environment is not wellunderstood, optimal tillage systems have not yet been identified. Othercritical data such as fertilizer response and conservation measures are notavailable for most areas of the state. However, agricultural land-useprojections have been based on classification data, more than seventy yearsof observation and experience in many areas, and many years of research innumerous locations.

CULTIVABLE SOILSALASKA 1973

SOURCE: SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE(EXPLORATORY SURVEY)

LEGEND

I FARMING

REINDEER AREA

RANGELAND

BASIN AREA

CLIMATICALLY MARGINAL

Figure 1.

Agricultural Regions of Alaska

Table 1.

ESTIMATED AGRICULTURAL LANDS AVAILABLE IN ALASKA FOR CROPSINCLUDED IN THE STUDY.

RegionClass 1(Group A)

Class 2(Group A)

Class 3(Group B)

Class 4(Group B)

Class 5(Group C)

Class 6(GroupC) RangeTotal

(Thousand acres)

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing Areas

TOTAL

1,626-

3111,247

545.._»

——153._~

3,882

1,571233

1,915

—._

—883_.

406

——..

5,008

1,625

——..

—-

—_.

355

—na.

—1,980

7241,372

610116

—..138„355

14na.

—3,329

~

75480~..~10234518915

na.._

1,206

—232

—409237._

—674426104na.

—2,082

a/a/a/

1,134210

2,2332,0961,163

a/a/

1,200100,000

108,036

5,5461,9123,3162,907

9922,2333,2192,1821,731

2861,200

100,000 b/

125,524

a/ No grazing lands were identified or included in calculations because of possible conflict with wildlife orother environmental factors.

b/ Estimates include only traditional reindeer grazing areas.

Data Source: USD A — SCS field notes adjusted by Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission work group.

Use of Agricultural Lands

Since not more than one eighth of one percent of potential tillablelands are presently being farmed, the following estimates of latentagricultural land use are necessarily projective in nature. The estimatingprocess has been based on identification of possible enterprises, present andprobable yields, future production systems, and identified land userequirements. Initial production estimates were calculated for those productsneeded for Alaska consumption (7), Subsequent estimates have beencalculated for a fully developed agriculture on all identified agricultural landswithin the state (8).

Land use estimates (Table 2) reflect the results of assessments regardingenterprise adaptation to climate and availability of suitable land, probablepublic institutions and services, transportation, labor requirements, nature ofthe product to be marketed, and proximity to population centers. Theregional distribution of croplands, near population centers, reflects theprojected needs of agricultural production for Alaska consumption. Lands inproximity to regional population centers have been identified for theintensive production of beef and swine, primarily for export. Least intensiveland uses such as ranch beef, sheep, and reindeer have been identified forthose areas which will continue to have low population densities. Also, morethan 6 million acres, classed as suitable for tillage, have not been identifiedfor crop production or grazing because of climatic or non-farm useprojections (Appendix Table 1.)

Selected enterprises were identified through a systematic screening ofcrops and livestock types which could be produced in Alaska, and wouldhave a good probability of entering intrastate and export markets (3, 4, 7).Land-use requirements have been calculated from enterprise budgets andprojected yield estimates (8).

Agricultural Production

One of the more discernible measures of the scope and magnitude ofprobable agricultural production is that of quantities of various types ofproducts, as typically reported by the U, S, Department of Agriculture'sStatistical Reporting Service. Such quantities have been projected (Table 3)for each type of crop and livestock product, by region. All livestockquantities have been reported in pounds live-weight for net production. Milkand eggs have been reported as gross farm production of salable product.Cereal grains have been projected as gross farm yields. Hay/silage has beenestimated as tons dry-matter in order to simplify aggregation of totalquantities of harvested forage. Dry-matter estimates must be converted toactual harvested yields if hay or silage tonnages are desired.Livestock and Poultry Numbers

A second discernible measure of the scope and magnitude of possibleagricultural production is that of livestock numbers. Such have been

Table 2.

ESTIMATED USES OF IDENTIFIED AGRICULTURAL LANDS BY REGION

Region

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinKenai Peninsula b/ c/Alaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham Block c/Alaska Peninsula, N. b/Kuskokwim BasinCopper River Basin b/Kodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing AreasSouth Central

TOTAL

CerealGrains

1,863445

1,0416

~233..403

2

—..448

4,441

Hay/Silage

1,00247361519

—26243

4286

..

—345

3,193

Pasture

(Thousand Acres)

548259314

34~197

75234

10

——188

1,859

Vegetablesand Fruits

_

—3~

—~

—~

—~„3

6

Other a/

2,133735

1,34337

—43173

66610

——789

6,217

Range

~....

8962,2332,0961,991

~258

1,200100,000

1,134

109,808

Total

5,5461,9123,316

9922,2333,2192,1821,731

2861,200

100,0002,907

125,524

a/ Lands in farms not tilled, lands used in enterprises not identified, and identified agricultural lands not infarms.

b/ Lands classified as tillable have been allocated to "range" use, due to climatic limitations and assumedcompeting land uses.

c/ Some "non-tillable" lands classed as range.

projected (Table 4) for both annual farm and ranch inventories and forannual slaughter. Slaughter numbers reflect the anticipated number ofanimals that could be harvested each year. Poultry numbers represent thenumber of laying hens that would be needed to produce eggs for a projected820,000 Alaskans (year 2000).

Farm Value of Agricultural Production

The most critical, and the most difficult, parameter to establishregarding Alaska's agricultural potential is that of annual value of farmproduction. Such a projection has been made (Table 5), using standardizedplanning data from the U. S. Water Resource Council (14). Future farmprices will undoubtedly deviate substantially from 1973 data, but suchprojections will provide one perspective of the possible scope and magnitudeof a fully developed agriculture in Alaska, Calculated values reflect onlyprices received by farmers at the first point of sale.

Other Resources Used In Agricultural ProductionLand use and agricultural production treats only one part of the latent

farming industry picture. Many other Alaska resources make up anotheraspect. Certain factor inputs such as labor, fertilizer, petroleum fuels, andelectricity, which could be provided from within Alaska, constitute industrydevelopment possibilities of significant magnitude, in addition to the farmingsector,Labor

A fully developed farming industry, in Alaska, would require more than55,000 man-years of labor on farms, including some 8,000 trained andqualified management personnel. This estimate (Table 6) has been calculatedfrom the U. S. average labor requirements for identified enterprises (1). Thenumber of jobs would undoubtedly exceed man years of labor since someportion would be seasonal in nature. The farming sector alone would providemore employment than fisheries, forestry, tourism, and mineral industriescombined. The agricultural processing, marketing, transportation, energy,input, and service industries would probably employ as many people as thefarming sector.

FertilizerA fully developed agricultural industry, in Alaska, would require some

2.9 million tons of fertilizer. This estimate (Table 7) does not include thatused for greenhouses, nurseries, public and private landscaping, revegetationprojects, or recreation facility uses. A major portion could be produced fromavailable phosphate and petroleum resources found in Alaska. Presentnitrogen fertilizer production at Nikishka fully demonstrates the technicaland economic feasibility of Alaska production. Large deposits ofphosphates, suitable for fertilizer use, have been identified in the southernBrooks Range (10). These two fertilizer ingredients, nitrogen and

Table 3.

ESTIMATED LATENT AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, BY REGION*

00

Region

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Areas

TOTAL

BeefIbs.

(live wt.)

873412503265

2632

25058

3738

13«_

2,813

PorkIbs.

(live wt.)

Lamb and ReindeerMutton Ibs.(livewt.) (livewt.)

MilkIbs.

Eggs(doz.)

(millions)1,833__

935316a/

——..~

—a/ _.

3,134

~

——a/~

~

u/~

—1.5 u/

26.4

1.5 26.4

— 300150

a/~a/~

a/~

a/

—

450

_.

6.76.7

a/-a/--

a/~

—~

13.4

Veg. andFruits(Ibs.)

SS

73.873.8

a/a/a/a/a/a/a/a/

147.6

CerealGrains(cwt.)

67.216.037.616.20.3

_.8.4-

14.50.07..

—160.27

Hay/Silage

(tons-D.M.)

4.11.92.51.40.08

~1.070.181.80.02

—~

13.05

* Estimated latent agricultural production calculated from regional data found Appendix Table I.

a/ Subsistence

u/ Undetermined

Table 4.

Dairy

<£>

a

RegionCattle

In HerdSwine Sheep Reindeer

In Herd In Herd In HerdCattle

In HerdPoultryIn Flock

CattleSlaughter

Swine SheepSlaughter Slaughter

ReindeerSlaughter

(Thousands)

Upper YukonLower YukonTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Areas

Total

1,673789958521

5871

497129715

2340

—5,474

4,602

—2,284

772..,„._

—.._

35400

7,658 35 400

~

—3317..—~..

—~~„

50

~.-

325325

._

—..

—....

——

650

767362441253

2530

22355

3287

12

—2,503

8,261

—4,1011,387

..

—........

14..

13,749 14

—..

«--

——--....

—..

80

80

* Calculated from Appendix Table I, (8).

Table 5.

RegionBeefLamb and Veg. and Cereal Hay and

Pork Mutton Reindeer Milk Eggs Fruit Grains SilageTotal

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Area

Total

373.64 723.07176.34215.28 359.04113.42 121.34

11.1313.70

107.0024.82

159.643.425.56 0.53

$1,203.95 1,203.45 0.53

(Million dollars)

403.2096.00

21.39 3.48 4.02 221.9010.70 3.48 4.02 95.64

1.80

50.40

87.000.42

14.08

14.08 32.09 6.96 8.04 956.36

201.3493.18

122.7268.64

3.74

52.428.74

88.190.83

639.80

$1,701.25365.52947.83417.24

16.6713.70

209.8233.56

334.834.676.09

14.08

$4,065.26

* Price data — U. S. Water Resource Council, Agricultural Price Standards, Guideline 2, (14),and USDA Agricultural Statistics - 1974 (1).

phosphorus, constitute a major portion of the critical fertilizer requirementsfor development of an Alaskan agricultural industry.

Petroleum Fuels

An Alaskan agricultural industry, as previously described, would requireabout 439 billion Btu's of energy for farm production alone. This wouldprobably be provided by 83.309 million gallons of diesel fuel (Table 8),125,363 million gallons of gasoline (Table 9), and 41.718 million gallons ofL-P gas (Table 10) along with 455 million kilowatt-hours of electricity(Table 11), Such quantities of petroleum fuels, excluding that used ingenerating electricity, would require more than 7 million barrels of crude oilper year to refine those needed for farm use.

Energy requirements for the farm production sector make up only asmall portion of that used in the agricultural food industry. Percentages usedin the various sectors, as identified for the United States, are: farmproduction 22 percent, farm family living 12 percent, food processing 28percent, marketing and distribution 18 percent, and the selected inputindustries 20 percent (not including feed stock used in fertilizer production)(12).

The farm family living sector would require some 231.24 billion Btu'sof energy which would probably come from the following: gasoline 32.4percent, diesel and distillate 21.5 percent, L-P and natural gas 26.5 percent,electricity 15.7 percent, and coal 4.9 percent.

The food processing industry, generated by a fully developed Alaskanagricultural industry, would require about 537 billion Btu's of energy, andthis would be provided from gasoline 0,6 percent, distillate and fuel oil 10.7percent, L-P and natural gas 48.4 percent, electricity 30 percent, coal 9.9percent, and other 0.4 percent, if it followed the present U, S. pattern.

The marketing and distribution sector, including both transport of foodproducts to consumers and transport of production inputs to farms, wouldrequire at least 347 billion Btu's of energy and could require as much as 500billion Btu's of energy. Some 91 percent would come from diesel fuels andabout 9 percent would come from gasoline,

Input manufacturing would require some 385 billion Btu's of energy,and the energy sources would probably be broken down in the followingmanner: L-P and natural gas 82.9 percent, electricity 12,4 percent, distillateand fuel oil 2.8 percent, coal 1.1 percent, and gasoline 0.1 percent (if itfollowed the present U. S. pattern).

A cursory perusal of the crude petroleum requirements, resulting froma fully developed Alaskan agriculture, would indicate: farm production 7million barrels, other sectors of the agricultural food industry 24 millionbarrels, fertilizer and petroleum fuels production 15 to 20 million barrels,and the equivalent of 18 million barrels for household preparation of foodproducts (6, 12).

11

Table 6.

ESTIMATED MAN YEARS OF LABOR REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISHLATENT AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION IN ALASKA, BY REGION*

Mto

Region

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTenana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillmgham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing Areas

Product EnterpriseTOTAL

Lamb and VegetablesBeef Pork Mutton Reindeer Milk Eggs and Fruits

(Man Years) a/

10,761 11,4105,0806,164 5,665 -- - 1,174 161 553,302 1,915 - - 588 161 55

300265

3,018649

4,59891

107 - 20300

34,335 18,990 20 300 1,762 322 110

RegionalTotal

22,1715,080

13,2196,021

300265

3,018649

4,59891

127300

55,839

* Acreage and production data from regional tables found in Appendix 1, (8).

a/ Calculated from Agricultural Statistics —1973, Tables 651 and 652, page 449,

Table 7.

ESTIMATED CROP FERTILIZER REQUIREMENTS FORLATENT AGRICULTURAL LANDS, BY REGION*

CO

RegionCereal

GraingsHay/SilageVegetables

Pasture and FruitsOther**Range Total

(Tons - thousands)

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing Areas

TOTAL

186.313.8

105.142.91.1

11.1

10.10.3

370.7

165.588.1

125.782.3

7.4

57.614.866.02.0

609.4

576.0306.7384.0 2.2196.8 2.2

12.9

165.525.8

229.83.6

1,901.1 4.4

UUUUU

U

U

927.8408.6617.0324.221.4

234.240.6

305.95.9

2,885.7

Estimates derived from published and unpublished data, judgements of professional agriculturalists,and information provided from research in progress.

Data not available on enterprises which have not been treated in this research effort.

Table 8.

ESTIMATED DIESEL FUEL USE FOR LATENT AGRICULTURALPRODUCTION (ON FARM), BY REGION*

Region


TOTALS

Beef

22,06410,41312,634

7,244524

a/5,0741,0409,430

151a/a/

68,574

Lamb and Vegetables RegionalPork Mutton Reindeer Milk Eggs and Fruits Totals

(thousand gallons)

8,140 30,20410,413

4,041 727 26 23 17,4511,366 363 26 23 9,022

524a/

5,0741,0409,430

151a/ a/

a/ a/

13,547 1,090 52 46 83,309

* Diesel Fuel Use — U. S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, The U. S. Food an^ Fiber Sector:Energy Use and Outlook, Sept. 1974; B.T.U. data from The Yearbook of Agriculture —1960: Power toProduce, (includes all farm use).

Table 9.

RegionBeefPorkLamb and

MuttonReindeerMilk EggsVegetablesand Fruits

RegionalTotal

Upper Yukon BasinLower Yukon BasinTanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing Area

TOTALS

(thousand gallons)

12,249

6,0812,056

1,094547

3838

3535

a/a/

103,190 20,3861,641 7670

45,45015,67026,26013,576

789a/

7,6351,565

14,191227

a/a/

125,363

Gasoline Fuel Use — U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, The U.S. Food and Fiber Section:Energy Use and Outlook, Sept. 1974; B.T.U. data from The Year Book of Agriculture 1960 — Power toProduce, (Includes all Farm Use).

a/ Not available.

Table 10.

ESTIMATED L-P GAS USE FOR LATENT AGRICULTURALPRODUCTION (ON FARM), BY REGION*

Region


TOTALS

Beef

11,0485,2146,3263,627

263a/

2,541521

4,72276

a/a/

34,338


(thousand gallons)

4,076 15,1245,214

2,024 364 13 12 8,739684 182 13 12 4,518

263a/

2,541521

4,72276

a/ a/a/ a/

6,784 546 26 24 41,718

* L-P gas use — U. S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, The U. S. Food and Fiber Sector: EnergyUse and Outlook, Sept. 1974; B.T.U. data from The Year Book of Agriculture —1960: Power to Produce.(Includes all farm use).

a/ Not available.

Table 11.

ESTIMATED ELECTRICITY USE FOR LATENT AGRICULTURALPRODUCTION (ON FARM), BY REGION*

Region


TOTALS

Beef

120.756.969.139.62.9a/

27.85.7

51.60.8a/

375.1


(million kilowatt hours)

44.5 165.256.9

22.1 4.0 0.1 0.1 95.47.5 2.0 0.1 0.1 49.3

2.9a/

27.85.7

51.60.8

a/ a/a/ a/

74.10 6.0 0.2 0.2 455.6

* Kilowatt hours use — U. S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, The U. S. Food and Fiber Sector:Energy Use and Outlook, Sept. 1974, (Includes all farm use).

a/ Not available.

Electricity

Farm use of electricity, as previously noted, would require more than455 million kilowatt-hours per annum, based on typical use patterns in theUnited States today. This estimate does not include that which would beused by farm families (790 mil. kw.-hr.), in agricultural food processing(3,550 mil. kw.-hr.), or in input manufacturing (1,045 mil. kw.-hr.).Identified petroleum reserves, coal deposits, geothermal and wind sources,and hydroelectric possibilities within Alaska constitute more than ampleenergy sources for added generating capacity needed in developing Alaska'slatent agricultural industry.

Factor Input Costs for Farm ProductionThere is little basis for accurately projecting farm production input

costs, at this time, other than as a percentage of projected farm salescomparable to that reported for the rest of the country (1). The followingestimates are for a fully developed Alaskan agriculture, as previouslyidentified, using data from AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS — 1973.

Estimated Farm Production Expenses

Feed purchased $556,311,000Livestock purchased 414,338,000Seed 66,556,000Fertilizer and lime 161,836,000Repair and operation of capital items 336,293,000Depreciation etc. 487,739,000Hired labor 255,313,000Taxes on farm property 201,226,000Interest on farm mortgage debt 126,144,000Net rent 88,802,000Miscellaneous 361,075,000

Total $3,055,633,000

The above estimates provide some perspective of the relative scale ofvarious farm production expenditures, and consequently some perspective ofthe scope and magnitude of possible farm service and supply industries. Itmust be noted, however that the combination of farm production expensesin Alaska might be quite different than found in the 1974AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS, which has been used as a base forcalculating the reported estimates even though costs as a percentage of salesmight be quite comparable.

18

Farm Machinery and Equipment

While it is not expected that Alaska's agriculture would be large enoughto support a farm machinery and equipment manufactoring industry, itwould provide opportunity for a substantial sales and service industry, Apartial list of the projected annual sales of farm machinery is as follows:

Tractors 1875Plows 470Field cultivators 140Power sprayers 370Side delivery rakes 150Pickup hay balers 220Field forage harvesters 190Combines 200Manure spreaders 280Power grinders and crushers 50Silo unloaders 160

At 1973 (stateside) prices the estimated annual sales would approach 40million dollars, and this does not include possible sales of several milliondollars of irrigation equipment each year.

Capital Investment in Farm Production Sector, As noted previously, estimates of this type are inevitably subjective,

and must be approached with caution. However, the ratio of farm sales tofarm assets, derived from 1973 nation-wide data, would indicate a capitalinvestment of more than $1,800 an acre for a fully developed maturefarming industry in Alaska. This would indicate a need for capital investmentof at least $2,500 per acre to bring large blocks of latent agricultural landsinto production, for land acquisition, clearing, soil development tillage andfertility additions, construction of buildings and facilities, purchase ofmachinery and equipment, and initial operating capital. Estimatedcapitalization for a fully developed farm production sector, by region, (Table12) would indicate some $23,9 billion in farm assets — at 1973 prices.

Distribution of Latent Agricultural ProductionThe scope of this report does not allow treatment of transportation,

processing, and distribution sectors of Alaska's latent agricultural industry,but general estimated of intrastate and export commodity uses (Table 13) doprovide some perspective of the scope and magnitude of those sectors. Itshould be noted that export products include beef, pork, reindeer products,milk and wool. As noted previously, this report does not include ornamental,environmental, and horticultural crops which could be exported whenproduction is developed for those crops.

19

Table 12.

RegionValue As A

Mature IndustryValue Per Acre

(tillable)Value Per Acre

(range)Value of NewDevelopment

Upper Yukon Basin, Lower Yukon Basin

Tanana BasinSouth CentralKenai PeninsulaAlaska Peninsula, S.Dillingham BlockAlaska Peninsula, N.Kuskokwim BasinCopper River BasinKodiak and IslandsReindeer Grazing Areas

TOTAL

(millions)

$10,0072,1505,5752,454

9881

1,234198

1,970283683

$23,914

(dollars)

$2,3461,4612,2602,460

939

—1,354933

1,480877

——

(dollars)

$ -

—._3030363030

—30300.83

(millions)

$12,4092,6666,9133,043

122100

1,530246

2,4433545

103

$29,655

* Asset values calculated from estimated sales and acres in farms and range, and reflect valuesof all components of a going farming concern. (1973 prices)

Table 13.

ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF LATENT AGRICULTURALPRODUCTION FROM IDENTIFIED LANDS IN ALASKA

tSD

Product

Beef (mil. Ibs. dressed wt.)Pork (mil. Ibs. dressed wt.)Lamb and Mutton (mil. Ibs. dressed wt.)Reindeer (mil. Ibs. dressed wt.)Milk (mil. Ibs.)Eggs (mil. doz.)Wool (mil. Ibs.)Reindeer Skins (thousands)Reindeer Antlers (thousand Ibs.)Barley (thousand tons)Oats (thousand tons)Hay/Silage - D.M. (thousand tons)Veg. and Potatoes (thousand tons)Fruits and Berries (thousand tons)

For AlaskaConsumption a/

95.5 b/51.70.80.8 c/

200.013.4

—10.0

~

8,014.027.8

13,050.079.31.4

ForExport

1,557.12,298.8

..12.4

250.0._

0.470.0

1,000.0

—————

TotalProduction

1,652.62,350.5

0.813.2

450.013.40.4

80.01,000.08,014.0

27.813,050.0

79.31.4

a/ Estimated consumption for 820 thousand population (year 2000), Alaska's Agriculture, AnAnalysis of Development Problems, Univ. of Alaska, ISEGR Report No. 30, Table XXXIX p. 162.

b/ Adjusted to 1970 U. S. Consumption Average for beef and veal. Does not include consumption dueto tourism and part-year worker population.

c/ Estimated trend increase in consumption.

Summary and ConclusionsAlaska's agricultural development planning has suffered neglect, apathy,

and innocous assessments because of the recalcitrance of public agencies andinstitutions to objectively and comprehensively identify parameters of latentagricultural possibilities in Alaska. This situation has resulted fromnegativistic images created by a miniscule, fragmented, and decliningagricultural "industry", unreal assessments of other resource based industrypotentials, and profound voids in agricultural industry planning data. Thesituation has been further complicated by the overly agressive pursuit ofenvironmental "objectives'' and public planning for parks, wildlife refuges,ecological reserves, scenic and historic sites, public forests, and petroleumand mineral provinces, without due consideration to the future social andeconomic well-being of the Native people and other residents of Alaska.

This report should provide one perspective of the scope and magnitudeof latent agricultural production potential in Alaska. It further identifiessome 17,5 million acres of tillable lands, by region. While climaticlimitations, geographic locations, and competing land uses introduceuncertainties in projecting future agricultural uses, production estimates havebeen made for 9.5 million acres of tillable soils, 9,8 million acres of domesticlivestock range, and 100 million acres of reindeer grazing. Particular care hasbeen exercised in deleting possible crop and grazing lands where severeclimatic or competing land uses were recognized.

Projected agricultural land uses have been identified in several ways.Field crop uses have been identified for 4.5 million acres of cereal grains, 3,2million acres of hay and silage, 1.9 million acres of cultivated pasture, and6,000 acres of fruits and vegetables. Livestock uses have been identified for5.5 million cattle, 7,7 million hogs, 35,000 sheep, 400,000 reindeer, 50,000dairy cattle, and 650,000 poultry. Less extensive land-using crops, i.e.greenhouse, nursery, grass seed, environmental, and recreation, have notbeen identified.

An annual value of agricultural production, at the first point of sale, hasbeen identified as being in excess of 4 billion dollars. This projection hasbeen based on estimates of sales of 1,7 billion pounds of beef, 2.4 billionpounds of pork, 800,000 pounds of lamb and mutton, 13.2 million poundsof reindeer meat, 450 million pounds of milk, 13.4 million dozen eggs,400,000 pounds of wool, 80,000 reindeer skins, 1 million pounds of (velvet)reindeer antlers, 8.0 million tons of barley, 27,800 tons of oats, 13.0 milliontons (dry matter) of hay and silage, 79,300 tons of vegetables includingpotatoes, and 1,400 tons of fruits and berries,

A second component of Alaska's potential agricultural industry, whichhas not previously been identified, is that of factor inputs used in farmproduction. A fully developed farming industry would require more than55,000 man-years of labor, petroleum fuels from more than 7 million barrelsof crude oil, 2.9 million tons of fertilizers, 455 million kilowatt hours of

22

electricity, and in excess of 40 million dollars of new machinery andequipment each year. Farm production expenses have been estimated at 3.0billion dollars, which provides additional perspective regarding the probablescope and magnitude of potential farm support industries.

The capital investment (asset value) per acre of agricultural production,excluding extensive rangeland, has been projected as being $1,800, andabout $2,500 per acre for bringing new lands into production. Theseestimates include all investments in land, buildings and facilities, machineryand equipment, livestock, etc. A projected value of a fully developed maturefarming industry in Alaska would indicate constant farm assets of more than$23.9 billion (at 1973 prices). Moreover, such estimates would indicateinitial farming industry development costs of some $30 billion.

The time element of full agricultural development in Alaska has notbeen addressed in this report since the intent has been only to providedefinitive parameters for the development planning process. The dataprovided should allow planning assessments of production possibilitieswithin each region of latent agricultural lands. It should also allow ethicalassessments of Alaska's agricultural production possibilities in comparisonwith other resource based industries and conflicting public land uses, ifpublic goals are to fully address the future social and economic well-being ofAlaska's present and future peoples.

23

REFERENCES

1. Agricultural Statistics — 1974, U. S, Department of Agriculture, U, S. Govt. Print,Office: Washington, D.C., 1974.

2. Alaska Agricultural Statistics, Alaska Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Palmer,Alaska, June 1975,

3. Alaska Power Administration — U. S. Department of the Interior, IrrigationPotentials Tanana River Valley Alaska — Supporting Report, Juneau, Alaska,February 1972.

4. Alaska Rural Development Council, Alaska's Agricultural Potential, prepared by theAgricultural Potential Committee ARDC Pub. No. 1, Fairbanks, Alaska, March1974.

5. Alaska Statistical Review — 1972, State of Alaska Department of EconomicDevelopment — Division of Economic Enterprise, Juneau, Alaska, December 1972.

6. Borgstrom, George, "The Price of a Tractor", CERES, Vol. 7, No. 6, FAO: Rome,Nov./Dec. 1974.

7. Burton, Wayne E,, Alaska's Agriculture: An Analysis of Development Problems,University of Alaska: College, ISEGR Report No. 30, October 1971.

8. , "Meeting the Needs of Tomorrow's Agriculture andAgroeuthenics Development in Alaska — The Public Sector'9, in Western Agriculture— Prospects, Problems, and Solutions, hearings before the Committee on Agricultureand Forestry, United States Senate, 93rd Congress — 2nd Session, U. S, Govt. Print.Office: Washington, D.C., 1974.

9. Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission, Land Planning and Policy inAlaska: Recommendations Concerning National Interest Lands, printed for theUnited States Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U. S. Govt. Print.Office: Washington, 1975.

10. , Resources of Alaska: A Regional Summary, compiled by theResource Planning Team, July 1974.

11. "A million population by 1990", The Anchorage Times, July 22,1975.

12. The U. S. Food and Fiber Sector: A Study of the Energy Needs of the FoodIndustry, prepared by the Economic Research Service — USDA for theSub-Committee on Agricultural Credit and Rural Electrification of the Committeeon Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senate, 93rd Congress — 2nd Session,U. S, Govt. Print. Office: Washington, D.C., September 1974.

13. The Yearbook of Agriculture — 1960, U. S. Department of Agriculture, U. S. Govt.Print. Office: Washington, D.C., 1960.

14. United States Water Resource Council, Agricultural Price Standards — Guideline 2.,U. S. Govt. Print. Office: Washington, D.C., 1975.

24

APPENDIX

25

APPENDIX TABLE 1ESTIMATED LATENT AGRICULTURAL LAND USE

AND PRODUCTION, BY REGION

Region Present Standards (a) Projected Standards (b)UPPER YUKON RIVER BASIN (above Tanana)

Agricultural Lands:

(Class 1 (c)Class 2Class 3Class 4

(acres)1,626,0001,571,0001,625,000

724,000

No grazing lands wereidentified or includedbecause of possible conflictwith wildlife and otherenvironmental factors.

Tillable Acres 5,546,000Non-tillable 0

TOTAL ACRES 5,546,000Estimated Production:BEEF (Intensive Farm System)

Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in Herd (no.)Slaughter (no.)

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOtherTOTAL ACRES

473 Mil, Ibs.906,268 head415,374 head

958,621 acres1,067,448

467,0091,558,1154,051,193

PORK (Controlled Environment System) (liveNet Product (live wt.) 944 Mil. Ibs.Hogs in Herd

(at one time) 2,305,814Slaughter (during year) 4,138,960

873 Mil. Ibs,1,672,668 head

766,642 head

943,416 acres1,001,889

548,0721,557,8164,051,193

weight)1,883 Mil. Ibs.

4,602,1808,260,960

(a) Present standards are a composite of statistical data (1970) andjudgements of professional agriculturalists, Table XL; page 165, (7).

(b) Projected standards assume committed public resources and dedicatedpublic research and service inputs. These standards were projected foryear 2000, but could be attained at a much earlier date, Table XLIII,page 168, (7).

(c) Refers to S.C.S, map classes in Alaska's Agricultural Potentials, AlaskaRural Development Council, Publication No, 1, pp. 20-21, (4).

26

919,881 acres574,926

Crop Acres Required:BarleyOtherTOTAL ACRES 1,494,807

LOWER YUKON RIVER BASIN (below Tanana)Agricultural Lands:

Class 2 (c)Class 4Class 5

919,881 acres574,926

1,494,807

Class 6

(acres)233,000

1,372,00075,000

232,000

Tillable AcresNon-tillable

TOTAL ACRES

1,912,0000

1,912,000Estimated Production:BEEF: (Intensive Farm System)

Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in Herd (no.)Slaughter (no.)

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOtherTOTAL ACRES

TANANA RIVER BASINAgricultural Lands:

Class 1 (c)Class 2Class 4Class 5

223,3123 Mil. Ibs,427,866 head196,106 head

452,431503,793220,409735,367

1,912,000

(acres)311,000

1,915,000610,000480,000

Tillable Acres 3,316,000Non-tillable 0

TOTAL ACRES 3,316,000Estimated Production:MILK (Controlled Environment System)

Net Product 300 Mil. Ibs,Cattle in Herd 45,035 headBeef (from cull

slaughter) 3.8 Mil. Ibs.

No grazing lands wereidentified or includedbecause of possibleconflict with wildlifeand other environmentalfactors.

411,8914 Mil. Ibs,789,184 head361,711 head

445,255472,851258,668735,226

1,912,000

No grazing lands wereindentified or includedbecause of possible conflictwith wildlife and otherenvironmental factors.

300 Mil. Ibs.33,470 head

2.8 Mil. Ibs.

27

Crop Acres Required:BarleyOatsHay/SilageOtherTOTAL ACRES 245,013

BEEF (Intensive Farm System)

53,052 acres17,02180,70494,236

271 Mil. Ibs.519,123237,932

548,926611,243267,419892,208

Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in Herd (no.)Cattle Slaughter (no.)

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOtherTOTAL ACRES 2,319,796

PORK (Controlled Environment System)Net Product (live wt.) 464 Mil. Ibs.Hogs in Herd

(at one time)Hog Slaughter

Crop Acres Required:BarleyOtherTOTAL ACRES

1,133,552 head2,035,104 head

452,116 acres282,573734,689

EGGS (Controlled Environment System)Net Product (eggs)Poultry in Flock

Tillable Acres Required:BarleyOtherTOTAL ACRES

6.7 Mil. doz.325,000

5,4173,3868,803

28,295 acres12,86041,00551,225

133,385

500 Mil. Ibs.957,503438,857

540,220573,702313,837892,037

2,319,796

935 Mil. Ibs.

2,284,205 head4,100,910 head

456,683 acres285,427742,110

6.7 Mil. doz.325,000

2,8891,8064,695

VEGETABLES AND BERRIES (Field Production Systems)32,206 tonsVegetable and Potatoes

BerriesTillable Acres Required:

PotatoesCabbageCarrotsCeleryLettuce

36,206 tons693 tons

2,550112194

901,185

693 tons

1,433358459

503

28

PeasOther Vegetables

Sub-TotalStrawberriesOther Berries

Sub-TotalTilled Acres

OtherTOTAL ACRES

255101

4,487

19062

2524,7892,9627,701

204101

2,418142

36178

2,5961,7924,388

SOUTH CENTRAL (not including the Kenai Peninsula)Lands:

(acres)(c)Class 1

Class 4Class 6

1,247,000116,000409,000

1,773,000Tillable AcresNon-tillable

(range) 1,134,000TOTAL ACRES 2,907,000

Estimated Product:MILK: (Controlled Environment Systems)

Net ProductCattle in HerdBeef (from cull

slaughter)Crop Acres Required:

BarleyOatsHay/SilageOtherTOTAL ACRES 122,504

BEEF (Range Livestock System) (d)

150 Mil, Lbs,22,517 head

1,9 Mil. Ibs.

26,526 acres8,510

40,35147,117

Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in Herd (no.)Cattle Slaughter (no.)

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOther

33 Mil. Ibs.73,491 head31,185

15,03848,29685,05092,440

150 Mil. Ibs.16,735 head

1.4 Mil. Ibs.

14,148 acres6,430

20,40225,61366,593

33 Mil. Ibs.73,491 head31,185 head

8,019 acres24,43242,52246,858

29

Tillable Acres 240,824Non-tillable (range) 1,134,000

TOTAL ACRES 1,374,824BEEF (Intensive Farm System) (e)

Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in HerdCattle Slaughter

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOtherTillable Acres

Non-tillable (range)TOTAL ACRES

117 Mil. Ibs.224,903 head103,061 head

237,815 acres264,813115,855386,537

1,005,0200

1,005,020

PORK (Controlled Environment Systems)Net Product (live wt,)Hogs in Herd

(at one time)Hogs Slaughter

(during year)Crop Acres Required:

154 Mil. Ibs.

375,498 head

674,144 head

BarleyOtherTillable Acres

Non-tillableTOTAL ACRES

149,827 acres93,642

243,4690

243,469EGGS (Controlled Environment System)

Net Product (eggs)Poultry in flockTillable Acres RequiredBarleyOtherTOTAL ACRES

6,7 Mil. doz.325,000

5,417 acres3,386

121,8311,134,0001,255,831

234 Mil. Ibs.447,903 head220,913 head

252,705 acres268,368146,808417,279

8,803VEGETABLES AND BERRIES (Field Production

Vegetable and Potatoes 36,206 tonsBerries

Tillable Acres Required:PotatoesCabbage

693 tons

2,550112

1,085,1600

1,085,160

316 Mil. Ibs.

772,302 head

1,386,540 head

154,394 acres96,496

250,8900

250,890

6.7 Mil. doz.325,000

2,889 acres1,8064,695

Systems)36,206 tons

693 tons

1,43335

30

Carrots 194 84Celery 90 59Lettuce 1,185 503Peas 255 204Other Vegetables 101 101

Sub-Total 4,487 2,418Strawberries 190 142Other Berries 62 36

Sub-Total 252 178Tilled Acres 4,789 2,596

Other 2,962 1,792TOTAL ACRES 7,701 4,388

INTRASTATE SHIPMENT (To Supply Feed Requirements of AlaskaPeninsula-Southside-beef and Kodiak andIslands District-beef and sheep).

Crop Acres Required:Barley 21,588 acres 11,787 acresHay/Silage 67,249 34,835Other 55,541 29,138TOTAL ACRES 144,378 75,760

KENAI PENINSULA

Lands: (acres)Class 1 (c) 545,000 The range livestock system ofClass 6 237,000 Beef Production was selected to

minimize possible conflict withTillable Acres 782,000 wildlife and recreation.

Non-tillable(1/4 of 840,000) 210,000

TOTAL ACRES 992,000BEEF (Range Livestock System) (d)

Net Product (live wt.) 24 Mil. Ibs. 26 Mil. Ibs.Cattle in Herd 53,020 head 58,055 headCattle Slaughter 22,498 head 24,635 head

Crop Acres Required:Barley 10,848 6,335Hay/Silage 34,841 19,301Pasture 61,354 33,591Other 66,902 37,017Tillable Acres 173,945 96,244

Non-tilled (range) 818,053 (f) 895,754TOTAL ACRES 991,998 991,998

31

ALASKA PENINSULA (Southside)Lands:

(acres)Range 2,233,000Tillable Acres 0

Non-tillable (range) 2,233,000TOTAL ACRES 2,233,000

BEEF (Extensive Range Livestock System)31 Mil. Ibs.

The range livestock systemfor Beef was selected tominimize conflict withwildlife, and minimize predation,


Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilageOtherTillable AcresNon-tillable (range)TOTAL ACRES

69,037 head29,295 head

2,233,000

32 Mil, Ibs.71,264 head30,240 head

Refer toSouth Centralfor Farm Prod,

02,233,0002,233,000

DILLINGHAM BLOCKLands:

Class 2 (c)Class 4Class 5Tillable AcresNon-tillable (range)Non-tillable

(1/4 of 1,915,000)TOTAL ACRES

1,123,0001,617,000

478,7503,218,750

BEEF (Range Livestock System) (d)Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in HerdCattle Slaughter




27,791 acres89,257

157,181171,393455,622

2,095,7502,541,372


14,822 acres45,15778,59186,606

225,1762,095,7502,320,926

32

BEEF (Intensive Farm System) (e)Net Product (live wt.) 73 Mil, Ibs, 188 Mil. Ibs.Cattle in Herd 140,511 head 361,136 headCattle Slaughter 64,389 head 165,489 head

Crop Acres Required:Barley 148,579 acres 203,751Hay/Silage 165,446 216,380Pasture 72,383 118,368Other 241,495 336,444Tillable Acres 627,903 874,943

Non-tilled (range) 0 0TOTAL ACRES 627,903 874,943

INTERSTATE SHIPMENT (To supply Feed Requirements of AlaskaCrop Acres Required: Peninsula-Northside)

Barley 24,293 acres 14,080 acresOther 15,183 8,800TOTAL ACRES 39,476 22,880

ALASKA PENINSULA (northside)

Lands: (acres)Class 5 (c) 345,000Class 6 674,000Tillable Acres 1,019,000

Non-tillable (range) 1,163,000TOTAL ACRES 2,182,000

BEEF (Range Livestock System)Net Product (live wt.) 53.3 Mil. Ibs. 58 Mil. Ibs.Cattle in Herd 118,732 head 129,038 headCattle Slaughter 50,382 head 54,756 head

Crop Acres Required:Barley See Dillingham Block See Dillingham BlockHay/Silage 78,022 acres 42,899 acresPasture 137,396 74,661Other 134,636 73,475Tilled Acres 350,054 191,035

Non-tilled (range) 1,831,943 (f) 1,990,962TOTAL ACRES 2,818,997 2,818,997

(d) Extent of range livestock system determined by available identifiedRange Lands.

(e) Determined by available tillable lands,(f) Lands classed tillable have been allocated "Range" due to climate

and use conflicts.

33

KUSKOKWIM RIVER BASINLands:

(acres)Class 2 (c) 406,000Class 3 355,000Class 4 355,000Class 5 189,500Class 6 426,000Tillable Acres 1,731,500

Non-tillable (range) 0TOTAL ACRES 1,731,500

BEEF (Intensive Farm System)Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in HerdCattle Slaughter



COPPER RIVER BASINLands:

1,731,499

Class 1 (c)Class 4Class 5Class 6Tillable Acres

Non-tillableTOTAL ACRES

(acres)153,000

14,00015,000

104,000286,000

0286,000

BEEF (Range Livestock System)Net Product (live wt.)Cattle in HerdCattle Slaughter

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilagePastureOther

7.0 Mil21,2516,507

3,12810,04517,68919,288

Ibs.headhead

acres

No grazing lands wereidentified or includedbecause of possible conflictwith wildlife and reindeer.

202 Mil. Ibs,387,474 head177,559 head

409,719 acres456,232199,602665,946

1,731,4990

373 Mil. Ibs.714,682 head327,500 head

403,221 acres428,212234,249665,818

1,731,5000

1,731,500

8.0 Mil. Ibs.23,268 head

7,125 head

1,826 acres5,5659,684

10,672

34

Tilled Acres 50,150Non-tillable (range) (f) 235,850

TOTAL ACRES

27,747258,250

286,000 285,997

KODIAK AND ISLAND RANGES (traditional ranch areas)Lands:

RangeTilled Acres


1,200,0000

1,200,0001,200,000

BEEF (Extensive Range Livestock System)13 Mil. Ibs,40,248 head12,324 head


Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilageOtherTillable Acres


Refer toSouth Centralfor Farm Prod.

0919,630

Net Product (live wt,)Wool (Ibs.)Sheep in Flock (no,)Slaughter (no,)

Crop Acres Required:BarleyHay/SilageOtherRangeTOTAL ACRES

1.5 Mil. Ibs.388,00035,28813,636

Refer toSouth Centralfor Farm Prod.280,370280,370


Refer toSouth Centralfor Farm Prod,

0920,689920,689

1.5 Mil. Ibs,388,00034,28813,636

Refer toCouth Centralfor Farm Prod,279,311279,311

35

Previous Publications of Series:

CREATING A NORTHERN AGRICULTURE

I. An Agricultural Development PerspectiveII. Historical Perspectives in Alaskan Agriculture

Alask200

Scale in Miles

400

Bering Sea

University of AlaskaInstitute of

Agricultural Sciences

Research CentersA. Fairbanks

B. Palmer

C. Homer

Research Farmsa. Fairbanks

b. Matanuska

c. Kodiak

Gulf of Alaska

Documents

Creating a Northern Agriculture - Alaska Agricultural …alaskaagresources.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/burton... · · 2011-10-25Creating a Northern Agriculture III, DEFINING PARAMETERS