Ranching and Grasslands Management in Contra Costa County
Native American Influences on California Rangeland
There has been ample evidence that Native Americans greatly changed the natural landscape
and had major effects on some wildlife species. They regularly burned selected areas in order to
improve hunting and harvesting and to produce desired materials. They planted seeds for annual and
perennial crops and transplanted trees and shrubs. California grasslands at that time were grazed by
great numbers of large native animals like Tule Elk, Mule Deer and Pronghorn Antelope which were a
valuable food source for the Native Americans.
The use of fire by Native American tribes in Contra Costa County, such as the Miwok and Ohlone,
led to the replacement of many forested lands with grasslands and savanna. These practices lasted
until long after the Spanish missions were established. New settlers in California failed to understand
and complained about this use of fire to the Spanish Governor who, beginning in 1793, periodically
issued edicts to stop the practice. The elimination of periodic burning led to dramatic changes in
native plant communities as much of Coastal California’s grassland and oak-savanna reverted to brush
species.
Pronghorn Antelope
Tule Elk
Mule Deer
Early European Influences on California Rangeland
Cattle first arrived in California in the spring of 1770 as they were driven by the Spanish from
lower California to the San Diego Mission. This herd of 165 head went to four other missions in the next
two years. By 1773, there were 204 meat and dairy cattle at ranchos near five missions. By 1800,
there were 75,000 cattle in California with two-thirds of them on mission ranchos.
During the years of Mexican Rule in California (1834-1846), the government granted 800 large
parcels of land to private individuals as an incentive to engage in ranching and agriculture. Mexico
opened trade with other nations, especially the United States, and the livestock industry shifted from
raising commodities for local use to raising cattle and sheep to export their hides, tallow, and wool.
Due to the lack of refrigeration, most of the meat could not be shipped very far and was discarded.
Following the discovery of gold in Coloma in 1848, the population of California grew to 100,000
by the end of 1849. In the next year, California became the 31st State in the Union. By the end of the
Gold Rush in 1860, the population had reached 380,000.
The Mission ranches, as well as many wildlife hunters and trappers, tried to supply the local
demands for meat and hides at the beginning of the Gold Rush. However, the rapidly expanding
population brought such a demand for meat that the local supply of livestock and wildlife became
exhausted. This led to large quantities of cattle, sheep, horses and mules being brought into California.
It also led to a huge shift of existing California livestock from Southern California to the Sacramento and
San Joaquin Valleys.
Alternating periods of severe drought and high rainfall in the 1850’s and 1860’s devastated the
growing livestock industry. Laws were passed to protect the rights of property owners by prohibiting
the free use of grazing lands. The laws first affected sheep grazing, and then in 1870, the “Open
Range” prohibitions were expanded to cover all livestock. These laws promoted barbed wire fencing
around private rangeland and the use of the more productive land to grow crops. This was the end for
many land grant rancheros founded during the Mexican Rule as most were broken up into small tracts
ranging in size from fifteen to a few hundred acres and sold for “farms”. The cattle industry shifted to
the margins of the grasslands and foothills.
Yellow Starthistle infestation
Roadside weed infestation
The Use of Livestock to Manage Natural Resources
Widespread overstocking and periods of severe drought during the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries seriously affected western rangelands. Overgrazing caused serious problems
such as erosion, water quality degradation, and the proliferation of noxious weeds. However, since
the passage of the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act more than three decades ago, a
vast complex of land-use regulations and Best Management Practices (BMP’s) are now in place to
monitor land use and to ensure compliance with regulations to protect water quality, critical habitat, and
endangered and threatened species.
There is considerable controversy over the practice of cattle grazing. In cases where the
importance of rangeland management has not been understood, land stewards have tried to create a
natural setting by removing livestock entirely. However, when grazing is removed, plant biomass can
build to levels that threaten the survival of native species. It chokes out the growth of native plants,
makes movement difficult for small animals, and creates the risk of destructive fires.
In the absence of large native herbivores to remove plant biomass and control invasive exotic
weeds, cattle can be used as a cost effective substitute. Effective grazing can maintain native plant
communities, enhance biodiversity, increase and regulate nutrient cycling in the ecosystem, and
improve wildlife habitat, as well as decrease fuel loads to reduce wildfire risks. Many endangered and
threatened species have survived because they are adapted to cattle grazed rangeland conditions.
Studies have shown that in the East Bay Regional Parks, over 40% of the cattle ponds in grazed areas
contained endangered amphibians. Experimental results from Sunol Regional Wilderness showed
that ungrazed plots had only .4% native plant cover consisting of 2 species while grazed plots had 21%
native cover consisting of 30 species. The Muir Heritage Land Trust in Contra Costa County had to
reintroduce cattle grazing to bring back the population of a native wildflower, Contra Costa Goldfields,
when it declined following the exclusion of cattle.
Many land stewards have found that the controlled use of domestic livestock is the most
effective tool for managing vegetation levels on rangelands. The goal is to approximate the same level
of grazing pressure as would be done by native animals. A measure called RDM (residual dry matter)
is used to track how much plant biomass is present. The number of animals needed is calculated on
an Animal Unit (AU) basis to establish realistic stocking rates that will result in a moderate level of
residual dry matter per acre at the end of the grazing season in October. This value is designed to
avoid overgrazing, minimize erosion, protect water quality, and reduce fast burning fuels.
Burrowing Owl
Western Fence Lizard
Grasshopper Sparrow
Grazing on Public Lands
California is the third largest state and leads the nation in both population and annual agricultural
production, with over $36 billion in value from over 250 commodities. California’s grazing lands
provided forage for cattle and sheep valued at $2.5 billion in 2004. In 1997, the University of California
estimated that California had about 31.5 million acres of grazing land, of which 49.1% were state or
federally owned.
In the San Francisco Bay Area, the majority of public land is owned by state and local government
agencies and special districts. Alameda and Contra Costa County currently have around 420,000
acres of grazing land. About 14% is located within the East Bay Regional Parks. Other large blocks of
land are owned by Contra Costa Water District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, U.S. Department of
Defense, Town of Moraga, and City of Walnut Creek Open Space. There are a total of eighteen different
public entities that use grazing to meet resource objectives on their lands. As grasslands transition
from private to public ownership, it is important to understand the role that livestock grazing plays in
maintaining the health and diversity in our open spaces and the economic value to our agricultural
industry.
Controlled livestock grazing is the most effective tool available to manage rangeland when
compared to the high cost per acre associated with prescribed burning or physical weed removal.
Public agencies use the money gained from lease agreements with cattlemen to fund conservation
projects and other park improvements. This benefits not only the public, but also the environment.
Ranchers that use public land often will have conditions built into their lease agreements to maintain
roads, fences, and other infrastructure. Consequently, public land managers and private ranchers
cooperate in order to continue grazing on public lands because both parties benefit.
But even in spite of this cooperation, many conflicts between environmental groups, livestock
lessee, and public land management agencies do happen. Some groups consider cattle destructive
and want all livestock removed, even suing the land management agencies in an attempt to eliminate
livestock grazing. They don’t seem to realize that even recreational use of public lands can cause
damage such as vandalism, arson, erosion, invasive weeds and diseases, etc.
Fire caused by lightning
Fire caused by arson
The Future of Grasslands in Contra Costa County
The natural landscape in Northern California is made up of many types of habitat, such as, oak
woodlands, wetlands, chaparral, and grasslands. The open space in Contra Costa County represents
a haven for native species and is valued for its beauty, adding to the quality of life for local residents.
Unfortunately, grasslands and open space in the Bay Area have become increasingly fragmented as
they are lost to development. Over the last 20 years, the population of Contra Costa County has
increased by 45%. This population growth is expected to continue or even increase in the future. By
some estimates, 120,000 acres of additional open space in Alameda and Contra Costa County will be
lost to development over the next 20 years.
A survey was conducted from 1993-1994 of over 100 ranchers in Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties to provide some insight on the values and viewpoints of the ranching community in this rapidly
urbanizing region. The study found that an overwhelming majority of ranchers felt that “feeling close to
the earth” (90%) and providing a “good place for family life” (94%) were important reasons to continue
ranching, while only 57% felt that profitability was a good reason. About half of respondents (52%) said
ranching accounts for only one-quarter or less of their total income.
Many agreed that overregulation (83%) and societal hostility towards ranching (65%) were
good reasons to quit ranching. Fifty percent said “to improve investment returns” was a good reason.
A majority of ranchers felt that environmentalism (88%), local land use planning (82%), statewide/
regional planning (82%), animal rights (82%), and the Endangered Species Act (81%) posed serious
Red-legged Frog
Tiger Salamander
threats to ranching. Though opposed to regulation, many ranchers felt conservation goals, such
as improving soil stability (90%), improving wildlife habitat (69%), reducing need for pesticides and
herbicides (68%) and protecting scenic values (67%) were important. Production values such as
improving livestock quality (98%) and increasing forage (97%) also ranked highly. Despite the
stewardship ethic, many Alameda-Contra Costa ranchers (52%) did not feel strongly that their property
should remain in production following sale. Some (23%) felt it would be a “good outcome” if their
property was developed for housing, and others (22%) felt an open space designation was desirable.
Many ranchers wanted their property to stay in private ownership (55%), while fewer indicated nonprofit ownership (13%) or public agency ownership (3%) would be a good outcome of sale.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has established a program, called Safe Harbor, in which
private landowners maintain and improve endangered and threatened species habitat on their land
in exchange for assurances that no additional future regulatory restrictions will be imposed. This
encourages landowners who may not want to risk improving habitat for fear that endangered species
may colonize their property. The Service monitors the property and provides technical assistance.
The Service also provides grants and other assistance to individuals and groups making conservation
efforts helping endangered and threatened species.
Trifolium willdenovii
Viola pedunculata
Lupinus bicolor
Oakland Hills fire damage
Grass fire
There is often a close relationship between private and public grazing lands in Contra Costa
County. Ranchers who may have a headquarter ranch on private land are often dependent on public
lands to provide a critical mass of land to maintain a viable ranching operation. In Contra Costa County
about 30% of the ranchers use some public owned rangeland to augment their ranching operation.
They may only be able to use the public land seasonally but they depend on it to make their operation
on private land viable.
Ranching as a way of life is an economic, cultural, and historical resource that is worth
preserving in Contra Costa County. Livestock grazing has proven to be a valuable tool to manage
natural resources and enhance diverse habitats in our open space communities. However, the future
holds many challenges for those within the livestock industry. Increasing fuel prices, traffic, rangeland
becoming fragmented, urban interface, vandalism, arson and trespassing are some examples of
problems ranchers face. Through cooperative efforts between private property owners, public land
managers and land stewards, these challenges can be overcome to protect the future of the livestock
industry within Contra Costa County.
Bay area rangeland habitat
Vernal pool