Food habits, range use and relationships between elk and livestock in the Gravelly Mountains, Montana
by Charles Dean Eustace
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management
Montana State University
© Copyright by Charles Dean Eustace (1967)
Abstract:
A study of food habits , range use and relationships between elk and livestock was made in 1965-66 on
a 130 square mile area of the Gravelly Mountains, Southwestern Montana. The past history of usage of
the area by elk, cattle and sheep was discussed. The physiography and vegetation of the area was
described. The vegetation was divided into three zones Fescue-Wheatgrass, Douglas-fir and
Spruce-Fir. Each zone was divided into several types. Quantitative measurements of canopy coverage
and plant density were made for many of the types. Use of each vegetation zone by elk and livestock
was evaluated. Food habits were determined from the examination of feeding sites; 79 for elk, 60 for
cattle, and 18 for sheep.
The diet in winter for elk consisted of 97% grasses and 2% forbs while in summer it consisted of 67%
forbs and 33% grasses. The spring diet for cattle consisted of 70% grasses and 30% forbs whereas the
summer diet consisted of 79% grasses and 21% forbs. The sheep diet consisted of 72% forbs and 28%
grasses in summer. The canopy coverage of individual plant species was recorded at each feeding site.
This provided a measure of abundance. A statistical analysis was conducted to determine the
relationship between abundance of individual plant species and their significance in the diets of the
animals. Negative, neutral, and positive food preferences were indicated. The summer range data for
each of the three animal classes indicated that the average canopy coverage was highest for those
plants' for which the animals showed a negative' preference. This may imply that the,abundance of
some or all of these plants was so great that it more than satisfied the needs of the animals, and was not
an actual indication of a negative preference. Species composition of the vegetation was determined on
the winter and summer ranges by the use? of 1,000 feet of basal intercept line transect. Forage
utilization was determined by the use of 14 exclosures on the winter range and five on the summer
range.
Circular O.96 square foot plots were clipped inside and outside the exclosures. Percent utilization was
indicated by the difference in the inside and outside total vegetation weights, air dried. Clipping results
indicated an almost equal percent utilization of total vegetation by elk and cattle on the winter range.
There appeared to be very little competition between cattle and elk on the winter range and none on the
summer range. Similarities of the elk and sheep diets suggested the possibility of competition on
summer range. •FOOD HABITS, E M G E USE AHD RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ELK
, AHD LIVESTOCK IH THE GRAVELLY MOUNTAINS, MONTANA .
"by
CHARLES D E M EUSTACE
A ^hesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial
'fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
i
.,
'
Fish and Wildlife Management
Approved:
% ^ d , Major Be^artment
Chairman,,Examining Committee
aduate Dean
M O N T M A STATE UNIVERSITY "
Bozeman, Montana
" Iferclu 1967
-:• • '
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
: i;"
To t h e ’f piloting, among others } the author wishes to express his
sincere appreciation for their eontrihutions to this s t u d y :
Dr. Don C.
. Quimby, Montana State University, who directed the study and aided in
‘I' •
' ;
■■■■:',
.
preparation of the manuscript; Mr* LeRoy Ellig, Mr, Joseph L, Egan,
Mr. Thomas Sch^urr, and other personnel of District Three, Montana Fish
and Game Dpp^ptment, for field assistance and cooperation; Mr. Virgil
Lindsey, District Banger, and all personnel of Madison Banger District,
Beaverhead National Forest, for assistance and cooperation; Dr. W. E. Booth
*
Montana State University, for aid in. verification of plant specimens;
Mr. Kerry Constan, Mr. John Kirsch, Montana Fish and Game Department, for
’
t-
field assistance and aid in vegetation analysis.
\
The writer was supported
b y the Montana Fish and Game Department, under Federal A i d Project W-73-R-IO
W - 7 3 -R-Il > and. W-73-R-12.
iv
. -.I
I- TABLE OF COHTEHTS
Page
.
ii
ACICNOV?LEDq-Mp;|T. .
Iii
TABLE OF COHTEHTS
iv
LIST OF TABLES. ;!.
vi
VITA.
.. ■ if :
LIST OF FIGURES .
»
*
0
0
0
*
*
__
*.
'k‘ABSTRACTo • ‘* • >
*
»
*
0
6
#
»
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
viii
*
*
*
*
»
ix
I
IHTRODUCTtOH
PHYSlOGRAPiPT OF STUDY AREA.
VEGETATIOH't3F STUDY AREA.
k
. . . . . . . . .
5
...................................... ..
5
.9
RAHGE USE AID MOVEMEHTS''. . . . . . . .
Elk » . . 6
Cattle. . .
Sheep . . -.
FOOD HABITS
* * * *
6
O
0
*
*
O
*
6
*
0
0
6
*
O
*
*
0
*
6
*
*
6
6
0
'e
6
o
*
6
*
*
0
0
# # »
6
*
*
0.0
*
6
*
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
0
14
14
*
*
0
12
12
12
12
12
.*
*
*
MD V£) VO VO
Fes cue t wlieatgras s Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
„'Fescue-Hheatgrass Type. . . . . . . .
i. . . . . . . .
Sa^eBnush-Feseue T y p e .. ... . . . . ... . . . .
.
tA s p e n —Willow Type
Douglas—Fin Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Timber Type
Sagehrush-Fescue Park Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aspen Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Engelmarm Spruce-Suhalpine fir Zone. . . . . . . . . . . .
Fescue-Wheatgrass Park Type
......... , . .
Sagebrush-Fescue Park Type. . . . . . . «
. . . .
Drainage and Disturbed Type . ..............
Timber Type . . . . . . . . . . .
......... . . . . .
*
6
*
#
O
*
16
*
*
16
19
20
21
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
Elk•
•
O
O O
»
O
O
..
o
.
O
. o o » O O
Winter R a n g e . . 6 . .
O
e
.9
O
O
Summer R a n g e . . . . O O O . . -O .
Cattle
.
Spring Range. . . . *
O
» 9
Summer Range. . • tt . O O
O
O
a
Sll60p o o'* o o o o . o 'O • O O O e O o
Summer. R a n g e »
• •
° • • • \ »
O
.
.
O
e
6
9
a
9
9
9
9
9
e
.
O
.
.
.
9
9
9
O
-a
6
9
9
.
e
»
•.
9
.
9
9
»■
9
9
9
.
Elk-Cattle . . . .
■Elk-Sheep. . . . .
zAPPENDIX.
. . . . . . . .
LITERATURE CITED. . . .
• *
•
*
*
°
•°
°
°
°
.
O
.
O
O
O
O
O
-O
9
e
.
.
9
.
O
O
O
O
9
9
9
9
9
.
9
•
•
* • • • •
•
•
•
•
• 6
•
•
°
»
°
1 • 9' * -• «•
*
d
*
*
d
31
9
6 * • *
• • • • ’*■ * » * *■ • °
e
9
9
9
e
26
26
26
» ° » • .. 4 o
• • » • » *
»
,*
• • » ° • • *
• • • • • * * • •
* •
22
22
22
25
25
V EGETATION CHARACTERISTICS
FORAGR UTILIZATION AND '
RANGE RELATIONSHIPS
■
9
9
9
9
*
Ao
Al
*
AS
9
5A
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1«,
Ho
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX,
X.
XI.
Page
CANOPY COVERAGE AED FREQUENCY OF TAXA FOR GRASSES, FOR B S ,
A N D SHRUBS ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS AND SPRUCE-FIR .ZONES
AS INDICATED B Y MEASUREMENTS FROM 2,620 TWd) X FIVE DECIMETER
PLOTS ON 193 SITESo . . ............................... .. . . * .
6
AGGREGATE PERCENTAGES OF BASAL INTERCEPTS FOR TAXA MEASURED
AL O N G 50 AND 100 FOOT LINE TRANSECTS (1,750 FEET TOTAL FOR
FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZONE, 150 FEET TOTAL FOR DOUGLAS-FIfi ZONE).
.
8
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION B Y MONTH OF .1,830 OBSERVATIONS OF
INDIVIDUAL .ELK IN 78 GROUPS ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS AND
SPRUCE-FIR ZONES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 17
ELK FOOD HABITS AS INDICATED BY 15,791 INSTANCES OF PLANT USE
A T 79 FEEDING SITES 1966. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
CATTLE F O O D :HABITS A S ,.INDICATED BY- 12,128. INSTANCES OF 'PLANT
USE AT 60 FEEDING SITES 1966. . . . . ..
i> . . . . . . .
27
StiEEP FOOD HABITS AS INDICATED B I 3,563 INSTANCES OF PLANT" USE
A T 18 FEEDING SITES 1966. . . . . . . . . . .
........... . . .
30
WEIGHTS PER ACRE F O R VEGETATION O N ELK WINTER RANGE AS
DETERMINED B Y MEASUREMENTS O F TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY O ..96 SQUARE
FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS IN FOUR ONE-ACRE EXCLOSURES . . . . . . . .
!■
"
^
VEGETATION COMPOSITION OF ELK WINTER A ND SUMMER RANGE AS ‘
DETERMINED B Y MEASUREMENTS OF BASAL INTERCEPT ALONG 1,000 FEET
OF LIITE TRA1TSECT o * o o o e q * o * * @ * a #
* @ * @ * » "
»*
32
34
FORAGE UTILIZATION BY ELK AND CATTLE AS INDICATED B Y WEIGHTS
OF VEGETATION F R O M TWO HUNDRED THIRTY O .96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR
PLOTS ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZONE
.........
37.
FORAGE UTILIZATION,BY ELK AND CATTLE AS INDICATED BY:WEIGHTS
OF VEGETATION F R O M ONE HUNDRED FORTY-SEVEN O .96 SQUARE FOOT
CIRCULAR PLOTS ON THE SPRUCE-FIR ZONE . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
PERCENTAGES OF 1,170 INDIVIDUAL ELK OBSERVATIONS ON WINTER
, RANGE, APRIL-MAY 1966,, LISTED B Y i SQUARE MILE. . . . .
. . .
45
vii
LIST OF TABLES
(ConIiinued)
Table
XII.
XIII.
XIV.
XV.
XVI.
XVTI.
'
Page
FOOD HABITS OF ELK AS IEDIGATED B Y 3,830 IESTAECES OF
PLANT USE A T 18 FEEDIEG SITES 1965. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FOOD HABITS OF CATTLE AS IEDICATED BY 5,439 IESTAECES OF
PLAET USE A T 24 FEEDIEG SITES 1965........... ..
47
FORAGE UTILIZATIOE B Y ELK AS IEDIGATED BY WEIGHTS OF
VEGETATIOE F R O M THIRTY O .96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS OE
THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZOEE 1966 ................ ..
48
FORAGE UTILIZATIOE B Y ELK A S 'IEDIGATED BY WEIGHTS OF
VEGETATIOE F R O M SEVEETY O .96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS OE
THE ,FESCUE-WHEATGRASS Z OEE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
49
FORAGE UTILIZATIOE B Y CATTLE A S IEDIGATED B Y WEIGHTS OF
VEGETATIOE F R O M SIXTY O .96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS OE
THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZOEE 1966 ........................... ..
51
VEGETATIOE COMPOSITIQE. OF ELK WIETER AED SUMMER RAEGE AS
DETERMINED BY MEASUREMENTS OF BASAL INTERCEPT ALONG 65O
E e e t o f l i n e t r a n s e c t ........................... .............
53
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
I0
Page
3
Map of the W a l l 'Creek Study Area
20
Fescue-Wheatgrass Type in the Fescua-Wheatgrass Zone . . . .
10
3.
Sagebrush-Fescue Type in the Fescue-Wheatgrass Zone.
10
4.
Aspen-Willow !fype center, in the Feseue-Wheatgrass Zone
with the Timber Type of the Bouglas-fir Zone.in the
background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
Sagebrush-Fescue Type foreground■and Aspen Type center
in the Douglas-fir Zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
5.
6«
. . . .
Fescue-Wheatgrass Type in the SprucerEir Zone, with the
Timber TJTPe in the background. .......................
.13
7.
Sagebrush-Fescue Type in the Spruce-Fir Zone . . . . . . . .
13
8.
Drainage Type in the Spruce-Fir Zone . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
9.
Forage preference in relation to abundance as expressed
b y percent canopy coverage on t}ae Spruce-Fir Zone. . . . . .
25
Grid. Map of study area for use with Table XVII in showing
locations of elk observations. Locations of line transects
and exclosures are also shown. . . . . . . . .
......... . .
44
10.
ix
,
ABSTRAqr
'
A study of food hab i t s s range use a nd relationships between elk a n d '
livestock was made in !$ 6 5 -6 6 on a 130 square mile area of the Gravelly
Mountains, Southwestern Montana.
The past history of usage of the area b y
elk, cattle and sheep was'discussed.
The physiography and vegetation of
the area was described.
The vegetation was divided into three zones|
Fescue-Wheatgrass, Douglas " ^ r and. Spruce-Fir. Each zone was divided into
several types.. Quantitative measurements of canopy coverage an d plant
density were made for many of the typ e s . Use of each vegetation zone by
elk and livestock was evaluated.
Food habits were determined from the
examination of feeding sitesj 79 for elk, 60 for cattle, and 18 for sheep.
The. diet in winter for e l k consisted of, Sllo grasses and 2 % forbs while in
summer it consisted of 6>7$ forbs and 33^ grasses. - The spring diet for
cattle consisted of 70$ grasses and 30$ forbs whereas the summer diet
consisted of 79$ grasses arid 21$ forbs.
The sheep diet consisted of 72$
forbs and 28$ grasses in summer.
The canopy coverage of individual plant
species was recorded at e a c h .feeding site.
This provided a measure of
abundance.
A statistical analysis was conducted to-determine the relation­
ship between abundance of individual plant species and their significance
in the diets of the animals.. Negative, neutral, a n d positive food
preferences were indicated.
The summer range data for each of the three
animal classes indicated that the average canopy coverage was highest for
those plants' for which the animals showed a negative'"'preference. This may
imply -that t h e ,abundance of some or all of these .'plants was so great that
it more than satisfied the needs of the animals, and was not an actual
indication of a negative preference.
Species composition of the vegetation
was determined on the winter and summer ranges b y the use of 1,000 feet of
basal intercept line t r a nsect.■ Forage utilization was determined-by the
use of 14 exclosures on the winter range a nd five oh the summer range.
Circular O .96 square foot plots were clipped inside and outside the
exclosures.
Percent utilization was indicated b y the difference In the
inside and outside total vegetation weights, air dried.
Clipping results
indicated a n almost equal percent utilization of total vegetation b y elk
a n d cattle on the winter r a n g e . There appeared to b e very little competi­
tion between cattle and ^lk on the winter ,range and none on the summer
r a n g e . ' Similarities of the elk and sheep diets suggested the possibility
of competition on summer r a n g e .
'
IITRODUCTIOH
According t o ;records of the Montana Fish and Qame Department, numbers
of elk (Cervus canadensis n e l s o ni) have increased greatly in recent years
on the Beaverhead national Forest in the vicinity of Wall Creek, Madison
County, Southwestern Montana (Fig. I).
3Q, and
158
Local ranchers reported about
6,
elk wintering on the Wall Creek area in 1935, 1942., and 1950 .
respectively.
Present numbers total nearly 300.
Depredations b y elk a n d mule deer (Qdocoileus hemionus) on. private
lands adjacent to public lands also increased b y the early
1950's.
To help
alleviate the depredation problem and to increase the amount of winter range
available to elk and mule deer, 6,467 acres of land adjacent to the public
I
lands were purchased or leased b y the Montana Fish, and Game Department
during
1960.-61.
This land, known as the Wall Creek Game Range, was reserved
exclusively for use b y game a n i m a l s .
Forest lands immediately adjacent to
the game range are used b y cattle in spring as well as b y elk and mule deer
in winter.
There appeared to be localized'grazing conflicts between elk
a n d cattle on the forest lands.
A n elk range and food habits study was conducted on the Beaverhead
national Forest in the southern portion of the Gravelly Mountain Range b y
Rouse (1956), but observations of competition between elk a nd livestock
w e r e limited.
Studies in Montana which included elk-livestock relations
were made b y Stevens (.1965) in the- Elkhorn Mountains, and, Mackie (1965)
in the Missouri River Breaks.
the Wall, Creek area.
1965
Findings were not entirely,applicable to
The objectives of m y study, during the summer of
and the spring and summer of
1966,
were to determine seasonal
-2distributions, movements> food habits, range use and relations to livestock
of the elk which winter on the Wall Creek Game !Range.
-3-
FOAEBT BOUNDARY
FEBCUE-WHB ATO A ABO
OOUOLAB FIA
BARUCE-FIA
VEGETATION
PRIVATE
ZONE--------
ZONE
ZONE
ZONE BOUNDARY—
LAN D
M A R K E D ELK MOVEMENTS IBBB------Q
RANOI
BUMMER
BTANOAI
ELK
FIOURE
L
M A P OF STUDY AREA
PHYSIOGRAPHY OF STUDY AREA
The Gravelly Mountain Range is a north-south range -approximately 32
miles long b y 8-20 miles wide lying south of Virginia City.
The east slope
of the Gravellies is characterized b y an initial abrupt rise in elevation
of
800
to
1,000
feet followed b y gradual elevation increases culminating in
moderately rounded mountain tops.
The west slope is characterized b y long
gradual slopes without abrupt elevation changes. ' Some major drainages have
cut deep V-shaped gorges but most drainages are relatively broad.
Elevations
range from 5>600 feet on the Madison River to 10,5^5 feet on Black Butte
Mountain.
The study area which consisted of approximately 130 square miles on
the east slope of the Gravellies, including Wall- Creek Game Range, was
■
bounded on the west b y the Gravelly Range Road,- b y Ruby Creek Drainage on
the- north,Elk River on the south, and.the Madison River on the east (Fig. l).
.VEGETATION OF STUDY AEEA
Plants were collected from the study a r e a «
was verified b y W. E..
Booth.
plant species in the field.
Identification of species
This plant collection aided in identifying
Scientific a nd common names are from Booth
(1950) and Booth and Wright (1962)«
•Classification of vegetation was influenced b y the works 'of Daubenmire
(19^ 3)5 and KLrseh (1966).
The
study
area was divided into three major
zones; the Fescue (Festuea spp.) - Wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.) Zone, the
Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga meaziesii'.) Zone, a nd the Engelmann spruce (Pjcea
engelmanni) - Subalpine fir (Abies Iasioearpa) Zone.
Each zone Vas sub-
.
divided into several types.
.Canopy coverage a n d
frequency of
occurrence of grasses, forbs, and
v
shrubs on many of these types was measured along
193
.
transects b y the canopy
.coverage method of Daubenmire (1959)(Table .l)» Twenty 2x5 decimeter plots
with five paces between plots were measured along tJk transects and ten plots
with two paces between plots were measured along the ^fthere.
0n
l4 unprotected
Qites
basal intercept @f plant .species was measured
along 50 foot line,transects (Canfield, 1941).
along a
100
■Measurements were .made
foot line transect in each of four sites protected b y exclosure
fences to exclude various types of hoofed mammals (see later section).
The
combined data for, all transects are included i n Table II.
Vegetation of timber types was studied mainly b y dirfect observation.
Feseue-Wheatgrass'-Zone
The. fescue-wheatgrass zone dominated from 5,800
divided into-three>.types.
to
7,000 feet.
It was
TABLE I,
CAEOPY COVERAGE AID FREQUENCY OF TAXA FOR GRASSES,'FORKS, AND SHRUBS ON"THE FESCUEWHEATGRASS AND THE.SPRUCE-FIR Z O N E S .A S .INDICATED-BY MEASUREMENTS F R O M 2,620 TWO X FIVE
DECIMETER PLOTS. ON 193 SITES.
Taxa l/
Feseue-Wheatgrass
SageFescuebrushWheatFescue
grass
Type
type
23 sites
'59 sites
870 plots 4-30 plots
■ Spruce-Fir Zone
Zone
AspenWillow
Type
3 sites
30 plots
Fescue- .■
Wheatgrass
Type
59 "sites
720 plots
SagebrushFescue
Type
22 sites
280 plots
Drainage- TimberDisturbed Type
Type
22
sites 5 sites
240 plots 50 plots
.Grass a n d Grasslike Plants
5/482/
=
-
tr/23
3/38
=
-
5/42
-
-
l/l4
-
=
1 /1 8
1/30
~
0
2 /3 0
8 /6 3
2 /2 0
=*
**
" '=
1 8 /8 0
25/93
■ -
a
3/49
ca
tr/l 5
Pea.spp.
Stipa columbiana
8 /8 2
Stipa eomata .
Trisetw spieatw
Or
J\
t
CO
Agropyron spi'catum
Agropyron subsecuadum
Sromus m a r g i m t u s .
Breams spp. ,
..Calamagrostis rubescens
Carex spp.
Danthbnia' intermedia
DeseHampaia eaespitosa
Festuea idaheensls
Festuca sea'terella
Hordeum HraehyantHerum
K o e l e r i a .eriatata .
P M e w alpinma
7/84
'=*
. 2/ll
-
=
-
3/30
-tr/5
CS
CS
10/73
l/l4
=•
=*
•
6 0 /9 7
-
tr /2
**•
-
«=>
15/52
1 5 /2 6
1 /1 8
tr/5
tr /2
-
3 /2 2
18/80
1 1 /7 1
tr/ 6-
4/19
tr /6
0
tr /6
5/50
2/l 6
=
.1/15_
-=>
2 /2 6
3 /2 8
l/ll
0
tr/3..
1/21
■ 8/72
5/33
7/63
3/24
«
5/51
l/l7
Ca
2/32.
’=
=
=.
2/38
=
-
Forhs
4/57
-
.6/69 .
CO
1/18
-
CU
Achillea millefolium
Agoseris g l a u e a .
-
5/77
3/44
••
3/42
'
5/67
2/29
. ON
1 /3 8
" l/l4
*-
TABLE I. ■ COETIBfUED
Feseue-Wheatgrass Zone
Taxa
Auteimaria spp„ Arnica cordifblia
Arnica sororia
Aster canescens
Astragalus, miser
Erigeron eemppsitus
Erigeron spp«
Erythronium grandiflorum
Fragaria spp,
•
Geranium vjscossisslmum
G e M triflbrum
r
sericeus
spp.
Phlox spp.
Potentjlla spp.
Tarakaeum spp,
TrjfbIium spp.
Viola nuttallii
FeseueWheat=
grass
Type
59 sites
870 plots
#
8"
SagebrushFescue
Type
23 sites
430 plots
.AspenWillow
Type
.3 sites
30 plots
Spruce-Fir Zone
FescueWheatgrass
Type
59 sites
720■plots
Sage­
Drainage- TimberbrushDisturbed Type
Fescue
Type Type
22 sites
22 sites 5 sites
280 plots-
1/10
3/#
6/42
1/16
, 1/8
:: h /h k
6/43
tr/5
9/21
1/20
2/1%
7/29
2/15
2/20
6/39.
7/60
1/23
2/39
1/21
tr/l4'
l/ll
6/34
2/12
V31
•
4/24
2/15 .
1/17
3/29
*$6
a/to
l/l 8
tr /16
5/27
tr /8
4/32
2/17
2/27
39/100
6/58
,
■S4/7^-
11/64
2/30
4 g /93
16/46
10/24.
6/37
10/55
'2/9
1/13
8/24
tr/4
2/17
e_
4/25
Shrub's
Artemisia
Artemisia t r i Aentata
Chrysothamnus Sppy
Bosa spp.
TetraAymia canescens
1/23
tr/l 2
2/15
T M
tr/7
tr /2
tr /3
iy TnmTndma mhiy taka with mean canopy coverage values of one percent or more for at least one
Vegetation type.
Exceptions are denoted b y tr (trace).
2/ Canopy coverage/Frequency. Mean percentages for the plots evaluated, on the vegetation types,
t
>
TABLE II,
AGGREGATE PERCENTAGES OF BASAL INTERCEPTS FOR TAXA MEASURED ALONG $0 AND 100 FOOT
LINE TRANSECTS (1*75© FEET TOTAL F O R FESCUE-WEEATGRASS ZONE* 1^0 FEET TOTAL FOR
D0|GLAP,-FIR>0NE)o_
Agropyron
Festnca
. Koeleria P d a '
spicatnm ■idahoensis eristata' spp;
Fescue=Wheatgrass Zone
. ■Fescue=Wheatgrass Type
Douglas=fir Zone
. Sagebrush-Fescue Type
.7
4.8
»7
4.2
.7
2 .2.
»9
Stipa
comata
.9
M i s c . JMLse,
grass J o r L s
.1
= ;:■'. Ii5
::
1.2
' 4.2
'
Feseue°Wheatgrass.
to 6,600 feet.
This type (Fig. 2). was dominant from 5,800
The lower ,portion was dominated b y bluebunch wheatgrass
(Agropyron spIeatma) and the upper portion b y Idaho fescue .(Festuca
ldahoensls).
Needle-and-thread (Stipa comata), bluegrasses ( P o a s p p e ),
a n d Junegrass (Koeleria cristata) were common in both segments with
needle-and-thread showing local dominance.
M s e r milkveteh (Astragalus
'■m i s e r ), pussytoes (Antennaria s p p . ), and silky lupine (Lupinus sericeus) ■
were common forbs.
Conmion shrubs were fringed sagewort (Artemisia frigida)
and rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus sp p .).
Sagebrush-Fescue
7,000 feet*
Type i
This type (Fig. 3) was dominant from 6,600 to
Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) was the dominant shrub
with Idaho fescue, bluegrasses and bluebunch wheatgrass important understory grasses.
Mlkveteh,
silky, lupine, dandelion (Taraxacum spp.), and
a species of arnica (Arnica sororia) were common forbs.
Aspeh-Willow T y p e : 'This type (Fig. 4) dominated drainage bottoms and
other mesic sites.
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and dandelion were,
the most common grass a n d forb respectively in the understory.
Rose (Rosa
spp.) was the most abundant shrub.
Douglas-fir Zone
The Douglas-fir zone dominated from 7,000 to 7,800 feet.
divided
into
three t y p e s .
Vegetation measurements were limited to two 50
foot line transects in the sagebrush-fescue park type.
b o t h transects were made in
Timber T y p e :
It was
1965 but
for only one in
Measurements for
1966.
This was the most extensive type (Fig. 4).
It was
-10-
Figure
3»
Sagebrush-Fescue Type in the Fescue-Wheatgrass Zone
-11-
-■ -
+ ■■
‘
.,
''T"'
...................
....
V ,
.3^.
%s I
Figu,e
U.
Figure 5»
- -
;
' ' ' i
."Gy
Aspen-Willow Type center, in the Fescue-Wheatgrass Zone
with the Timber Type of the Douglas-fir Zone in the
background.
Sagebrush-Fescue Type foreground and Aspen Type center
in the Douglas-fir Zone.
=IS=
characterised h y a dense overstory of Douglas-fir with occasional whitehark
pine (Finns ,alhieamlis) and limber pine (Finns flexilis). , Common shrubs
were roundleaf snowbefry (Symphoricarpos
(.Berberis repens ).
nant grass.
oreophilns)
and Oregon grape
Pinegrass (Calamagrostis' rubescens) was the predomi­
Potentilla (Potentilla-spp»)
and
strawberry (Fragaria spp«)
were common fo r b s ,
Sagebrush-Fesene Park ~% r p e :
parks throughout the. zone.
This type (Fig. 5)
Ia many areas it
was
was
found in open
merely a n upward
extension of the sagebrush-fescue type from the grassland zone.
Data in
Tables I and II show similarities in the occurrence of certain grasses for
the type in-both zones.
Aspen "Typet
Mils type (Fig. 5) was found in drainage bottoms, rocky
outcroppings, a n d certain side hill ■e x p o s u r e s Bae understory was very
similar-to the
aspen-willow
type in the feseue-wheatgrass zone.
Engelmann spruce-Subalpine fir Zone
This zone predominated from 7,800 to 9,200 feet with frequent
occurrences at lower elevations on north facing slopes.
types were described.
Four important
> '
Fescue--Wheatgrass Park Type I
This type (Fig.
sites in parks and along ridge' tops.
6)
occupied the xeric
Important grasses a nd grass like
plants were Idaho fescue,.bearded wheatgrass (Agropyron subsecundum.),
sedge (Garex s g p . ), and.bluegrasses.
yarrow (Achillea mlllefollim), and
Sagebrush-Fescue P a r k Ty-pe :
Dandelion,'daisy (Erigeron spp.),
potentilla
were common forbs.
Ihis type. (Fig, 7) occupied the mesie
t
%
-13-
Figure
6.
Fescue-Wheatgrass Type in the Spruce-Fir Zone with the
Timber Type in the background.
I
=■
drainages and small depressions' In the
fescue-wheatgrass
park type*
Big
sagebrush was the dominant overstory with Idaho fescue, sedge, and
bluegrasses important uriderstpry grasses and grass-like plants*
Dandelion,
potemtilla, and clover (Trifolium s p p * ) were common forbs *
Drainage and Disturbed Types
This consisted of two. small subtypes
at.elevations of 8,800 feet ,and above*
Disturbed sites were steep hill­
sides which were covered b y deep snow banks for a considerable portion
of the year, greatly reducing the vegetative cover*
8)
consisted ©f both low gradient
drainages
Drainage sites (Fig*
and depressions which received
above average moisture*
This type was characterized b y sedge, bluegrasses,,
spike trisetum (Trisetum
spicatum),
caespitosa)*
and tufted hairgrass (Deschaarpsia
Dandelion, potentilia, a nd clover were common forbs.
Timber T y p e :
This type (Fig*.
6)'was
characterized b y an Engelmann
spruce-subalpine fir climax with scattered, areas of lodgepole pine
(Pinus
contorts),
whitebark piae, and limber pine.
Common understory
plants ■were" low red huckleberry (Yaceinlum segpariuia)j>■meadow rue
(Thalictrum spp.), a n d Heartleaf arnica (Arnica cordifolla).
Data in
Table I were collected on five elk feeding sites in semi-open whitebark
pine bordering the closed canopy timber type, and are" not a true
representation of the timber type.
Figure 8
Drainage
T y j> e
in tie Spruce-Fir Ztine0
EAlGE USE A I D MOVEMEBTS
Elk
During
1965-66^ 1,830
area (Table III).
■■
''
observations of individual elk in Jd group's
were recorded-by vegetation type during
,r
'
78
observation trips in the study
Many elk',were observed repeatedly on successive trips.
'
^
fescue-wheatgrass
■ Elk were observed only on the
zone in April,
The
fescue-wheatgrass and sagebrush-fescue types received all of the usage
noted.
Most use was.confined to public lands adjacent to the game, range
but others have observed elk using portions of the game r a n g e ■extensively
during mid-winter.
Certain south facing slopes and ridges received the
most intensive use (Table XI a n d Fig. 10, Appendix).
The timber type of
the Douglas-fir zone was u s e d for escape a nd resting cover.
•.
•
'
During the '
'
/
th i r d week of April, a decreased number of elk was o b s e r v e d ,on the winter
range'hut the number observed during the fourth week'increased. • This was
probably due to a heavy snow fall at the end of the third week which caused
a downward, movement of elk.
May
6.
Ho. elk were observed on. the winter range after
Pieton (i 960) reported elk leaving the Sun Biver winter range in
■■
northern Montana, during the last week in April. ■
Elk were not observed again until the Ihst week of May.
Almost all
were in the fescue-wheatgrass and sagebrush-fescue types of the spruce-fir
zone.
This suggested a rapid upward movement through the intermediate'
Douglas-fir zone.
During late May a n d 'early June two-year olds a nd calves of the
“it
previous spring (yearlings) were observed'together in small groups.
were generally observed singly or in small groups.
observed at this time
Bulls were rarely
Cows
TABLE III.
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION B Y MONTH OF 1,830 OBSERVATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL ELK IN ?8
GROUPS ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS AND SPRUCE-FIR ZONES.
Fescue-Wheatgrass
■ Zone
Month
April
May
June
July
August
September
Fescue-'
Wheatgrass
Sage­
brush
Fescue
Type
Type
55/7^
91/8
W l l
-
-
—
-
-
-
-
Spruce-Fir
Zone.
FescueWheat grass
■ Type
Sage­
brushFescue
Type
6/3
3/3
92/9
27/7
57/3
-
8 /5
23A
«0
DrainageDisturbed
Type
-
-
-
-
32/8
-
Timber
Type
—
-
l/
Percent of individual elk dbservations/number of g r oups.
2/
Total number of individual elk observations/number of groups.
18/3
43/6
lOO/l
Total
605/18'
284/14
105/14
784/22
51/9
1/1
In June extensive use was made of the xerie fescue-wheatgrass type
b y cowso
Hewborn calves were first observed on the 4th of June.
were in the sagebrush-fescue type.
They
Dense sagebrush was twice observed
to be u s e d for concealment of calves temporarily left alone b y cows.
. Cows formed larger groups in mid-June and frequently remained in open,
parks for the entire day.
In July increased use was made of the timber type during the day
w i t h feeding periods restricted to early morning and late evening.
This
m a y have b e e n partially caused b y the increasing numbers of insects.
The
greatest numbers of elk were observed during July because, of the large
aggregations present.
Two groups of 106 arid one group of 80 were counted
•Blk utilized the highest s e g m e nts■of their summer range from early to
mid-July feeding on ridge tops and high open parks.
In late July elk
use decreased on the high ridges and increased on the lower more mesic
sagebrush-fescue and disturbed-drainage types. . This may have been due
to a desiccation of forbs on the more ,xerie sites.
A sharp decrease in the group size a nd number of elk observed
occurred in August.
Stevens (1965)»
A similar observation was made b y Kirsch (1962) and
Blk used l o w heavily timbered areas and timbered
drainages in the spruce-fir zone.
Vision was extremely limited in these
areas.
In January
,
1965,
two elk, a cow and a calf, were individually marked
w i t h neck bands to aid in determining seasonal movements. -Relocations
i
'
.
were recorded only for the cow (Fig. I). .Eight relocations,- two on the.
“1 9 “
winter range a n d six on the summer range, indicated a yearly movement of
6§- airline
at least
miles from winter to summer range.
Cattle
Cattle entered the Wall Creek spring range on June 15 during
and
19660
1965
■ Cattle grazed an d rested almost exclusively on the .fescue-
wheatgrass and sagebrush-fescue types of the fescue-wheatgrass zone during
mid=June,
In late June and early July considerable use was made of the
aspen-willow type of the fescue-wheatgrass zone and the timber type of the
■Douglas-fir zone for feeding and resting.
During this period the fescue-
wheatgrass a n d sagebrush-fescue types were used very early in the morning
and late in the evening.
Cattle distribution ©n the spring range was affected b y the Cattle­
man's Association rider who tried to keep the cattle uniformly distributed.
Cattle entered the summer range b y the 15th and 26th of July for
and
1966
respectively.
1965
Most of the cattle started at the highest, point on
the summer range and worked downward as the summer progressed.
During
1965
cattle were fairly evenly distributed over the fescue-
wheat grass and sagebrush-fescue types of the spruce-fir zone.
In
1966
the fescue-wheatgrass type was little u s e d through the first week of
•August,
At this time drainages containing the sagebrush-fescue and
drainage-disturbed types were used almost exclusively,
Dy mid-August
cattle were feeding heavily on the fescue-wheatgrass and sagebrush-fescue
types,
Tiniber types were u s e d as resting areas.
Cattle and elk were never observed t o use the same area for feeding
I
1
aS O eo
simultaneously even though cattle were on the summer range during the
period when the largest concentrations of elk were recorded.
Ellk were
observed to run from one feeding site when approached b y a n Angus cow
a n d calf.
Sheep
■ Sheep range in the Gravellies is restricted to' the higher elevations
in the spruce-fir zone.
Grazing begins when the Forest Service determines
the range is "ready", usually about mid-July.
The various sheep bands
leave the summer range at different times due to different sized allotV
ments and sheep bands.
All observations on sheep were made oh the Standard Greek Allotment.
Heaviest use was on the fescue-wheatgrass type with disturbed types
receiving moderate use.
afternoon on.
day.
Grazing occurred in. the morning an d from m id­
Timber types were used, f or shade and resting during the
Movements were largely controlled b y the herder who followed a plan
established b y the Forest Service.
FOOD HABITS
A total of 40,661 instances of plant use was recorded on
199
feeding
sites to determine the importance of various plant species in the elk,
cattle, a n d sheep
diets*
Feeding site examinations were conducted
immediately after the feeding site had been vacated b y feeding animals*
Each "bite" from a plant was recorded as one instance of use as described
b y Khowlton (1960)»
The percent of the diet constituted b y each plant
species was computed for each feeding site.
These percentages were
1
totaled a n d averaged using the aggregate percent method (Martin et al,
1946)„
Daubenmire transects were run in conjunction with each individual
feeding site to determine the percent canopy coverage of each species on
the feeding site.
The average of the differences between the percent of
the diet and the percent canopy coverage for each species was tested
statistically b y a two-tailed t-test at the five percent level- of
significance (Li,
1965)®
■ The hypothesis tested was;
there is no
significant difference between the percent of the diet constituted by. an
individual species a n d its abundance in the plant community (expressed
as percent canopy coverage||
Each plant species was placed statistically
in one of three animal preference
categories;
(l) a positive preference
indicated the plant species was utilized in proportions Significantly
greater-than its
abundance, (2 )
a neutral-preference indicated the plant
species was utilized more.or less in proportion to its abundance, and
(3 ) a negative preference indicated -the plant species was utilized in
proportions Significantly less than its abundance.
two years could not be tested
together
The results- for the
statistically because -of a methods
change
tjhe second, year.
In most, cases during; the first
summer^.only
those species which w e r e -utilized were identified h y .'species on the
Daubenmire transect.
grasses or
forks.
All other vegetation was lumped under miscellaneous
This did not take into account plants which were
frequently present but seldom utilized.
This was corrected the second
year b y recording all species which could be identified whether or not
4
z
they h a d b e e n utilized.
Even though the results for both years follow
similar trends it is felt that the statistical analysis for
meaningful.
Therefore only the
a n d VI.
1965
The
1966
1966
is more
data are included in Tables IV, V
data are included in Appendix Tables X l l and XIII.
,Elk
Winter R a n g e ;
for
38
A total of 7,791 instances of plant use was recorded
feeding sites.
Usage was divided as follows;
grasses
,
2$, a n d browse Vfoa
forbs
A definite preference was indicated .for the new
spring growth of.Idaho fescue a nd bluegrass.
89%
96$,
••
These two grasses formed
of the total diet. ’ Ho preference.was shown for either forbs or
browse,.
Browse was. of importance only once.
This followed a late April
snow storm when rabbitbrush formed 22$ of the diet on one site. ■
Summer R a n g e ;
hi feeding sites.
A total of.8,000 instances of use was. recorded for •
Usage was divided into
67$
forbs and 33$ grasses.
Utilization of grasses decreased sharply in late Ifey and: early June
forbs began to appear.
the summer range.
' •
when
Ho.preference was shown for any grass species on
All were taken in apparent proportion to their
abundance or at a level b e l o w their
abundance.
TABLE IV.
E L K FOOD HABITS AS INDICATED B Y 15,791 INSTANCES OF PLANT USE A T 79 FEEDING SITES 1966,
_____ 38
Taxa
Lcatttm
Agropyron suLseetmdum
Bromus spp«
Carex spp.
Festuca idahoensls
Festuca scabrella
Koeleria eristata
Poa spp.
Trisetum spieatum
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass
Nunflaer'
Instances
of use
579
5433
’ 75
1381
Winter .
April-May
Feeding Sites
of
Diet
.
qi/
Summer
May-August
4l Feeding Sites
^ .',of t -Talue
Com- 380
muh- plots
Ity
'
k§/
4.1
71
22
+16.965s
I
I
11
+0.654
+4.738s
18
Achillea millefolium
Agoseris glauea
Arnica eordifolia
Delphinium Lieolor
Efigeron spp.
Geranium viscossissimum
Geum triflorum
Pedicularis cystopteridifolia
Potentilla spp.
Taraxacum spp.
Trifolium s p p .
Miscellaneous fofbs
Total fofbs
-5.685s
Number
''Instances
of use '"
>
of
Diet
i'ot
t -value
CommunIty
410
plots
-
156 .
118
355
432
... 94.
670
201
""'601 '
2
I
4
5
I
8
3
6 •
30
206
3
8
613
209
3
128
2
90
I
6
441 .
400
’5
190
2
96
1
6
505.
1331
17
2
195
575
7
63
4979
I
-2.587s
+0.818
6
14
3
-5.155S
-5.450S
3
-3.326s
9
-O.386 ro
3
6
+0.338
+0.315
-
6
4
tr
2
3
I
5
3
tr
10
22
6
11
-4.347s
+4.019s
+1.867
+0.204
-2.318s
+3.1623
+0.052
-0.129
-+0.735
-3.4398
-2.700s
-3.678s
-4.260s
Y
TABLE I V e
(Continued)
l/
Only those species which comprised more than one percent of the total diet are included,
2/
As determined b y canopy coverage,
3/
IS indicates a significant t -value which may b e either positive or negative.
-25
O ■ neutral preference
+ ■ positive preference
- ■ negative preference
Fig. 9 Forage preference In relation to abundance as expressed
by percent canopy coverage on the spruce-fir zone.
Usage of forbs shoved a subsequent gain during the summer.
A
positive preference was shown for only two forbs, pale agoseris (Agoseris
g l a u c a ) and sticky geranium (Geranium viscossissimum).
The data indicate
that with the exception of daisy (Erigeron spp.), the forbs for which
there was a significant negative t-value were the most abundant species
in the forb community.
This trend also holds if all canopy coverage
values are averaged for grasses and forbs (Fig. 9)«
This may imply that
some or all of these plants were not actually associated with a negative
preference, but that their abundance was so great as to more than satisfy
the needs of the elk.
Cattle
Spring R a n g e :
on 37 feeding sites.
A total of rJ
6 instances of plant use was recorded
Usage was divided into rIOjb grasses and 30$ forbs.
=26A positive preference was recorded for blueVuneh wheatgrass, one-spike
oatgrass (Bahthonia u n i spicata ) , and needle-and-thread,
Junegrass was
the only grass for which a negative preference was indicated.
All other
grasses appeared to "be taken in amounts fairly close to their abundance.
Among forbs, a definite preference was noted for prairie milkvetch
(Astragalus striatus) and bastard toadflax (Comandra u m b ellata).
Prairie
milkvetch was taken almost to the exclusion of all other species when
cattle first entered the range.
Arnica was the only forb for which a
negative preference was indicated.
Summer E a m g e :
A total of 4,652 instances of plant use was recorded
On 23 feeding sites.
Usage was divided into 79$ grasses and 21$ forbs.
A positive preference was shown for bearded wheatgrass, sedges, meadow
bar l e y (Hordeum braehyantherum)j, and bluegrass.
Idaho fescue was also
important but was'generally taken, in-proportion to its abundance.
negative preference was shown for the majority of forbs.
A
A decrease in
the use of forbs accompanied b y a tripling of the average percent canopy
coverage for forb species on the summer range may account for these
negative preferences.
As w i t h elk, it would appear that the abundance of
forbs was greatly in excess of the cattle nee'ds.
Sheep
Summer E a n g e :
on
18
feeding sites.
A total of 3;5&3 instances of plant use was recorded
Usage was divided into
28$
grasses and 72$ forbs.
Most grasses were taken in proportion to their abundance except Idaho
fescue for which a negative preference was indicated.
Idaho fescue.
TABLE V.
CATTLE FOOD HABITS AS INDICATED BY 12,128 IESTAJfCES OF FLAJfT USE A T 60 FEEDIJfG
SITES 1966.
.
Spring
June-July
37 Feeding Sites
Taxa
AgropyrtQn gpicat-qm
Agropyron sub'seetmdum
Calaaiagrostis montanensis
Garex spp.
Danthonia intermedia
Danthonia -gnispieata
Desehampsia eaespitosa
Festuea i d a h o e n s l s ~ Festuca'serahrella
Hordeum hrachyantherum
Koeleria cristata
Phleum alpinum
Poa Sppe
Stipa columbiana
Stipa comata
Trisetum spicatum
Miscellaneous .grass
Total grass
lumber
. Instances
of use
# of
Diet
727
«=
IO^
C
,
# of
Commanity
t -value
,370
•plots
206
81
3 '
I
2
<=»
-
108
I
=
-
tr
-
-=
+ I e66l
-0.452
'=
+4.5358
-
-1.905
I
»
19
~
4
»
627
9
9
«=j
-
-
26
10
+5.951s
58
. I
I
-
4873
68
-
1109
=
99
1858
..
lumber.
Instances
of use
$ Qf
Diet
ja Of
Commanity
t-value
230
plots
+2.5788^
=.
I
16
Summer
July-August
2;5. Feeding Sites
■=»
-4 .428s
256
=■
1052
23
94
2
.-,r ^
146
3
.14
5
661
221
78
=»
62
=eOoSoS
—‘
+ 0.881
-
5
<=
466
367
-
223
96
3722
2
I
10
8.
-
4
C=
17
3
3
10
4
I
=
tr
7
7
-
+2.209S
«=
+2.712S
-I.830
-0.253
+ O .995
+ 0.388
+ 25.618s
. =»
+ 1.367
+2.1228
+ I .434
5
2
2
80
I
+1.842
+2.7198
-
-
TABLE Ye
(Continued)
Spring
June-=July
37 Feeding Sites
Taxa.
A e M l j e a millefolium
.Agoseris glauea
Ariaiea sororia
Aster eaneseens
Astragalus striatus
Comandra umbellata
.Erigeron spp,
Geum triflorum
Poteatllla spp«
Taraxacum sppe
Trifolium spp»
Miscellaneous forts
Total fdrbs
In- v Diet
stances
of use
Com­
mun­
ity
; «=.
0
66
2
-
=
2
-3.670S
143
-
3.
-
120
2
27
-
220
-
1710
370
plots
6,
=
I
I
3
I
I
.=
5
4
117
343
•:.70l
Summer
July-August
23 Feeding Sites
5
10
"4
=,
-
'
+0.447
+0.847
■
•'+3.866s
+2.963s
=■
=1.330
-4.2918
In­
stances
of use
68
76
=
=
<=
=*
Cf- ; ;:•
69
44
72
383
82
90
885
Diet
I
.
2
"=»
=■
-=
2
I
2
8
.2
. 2
20
230
Commun-'. . plots
ity
5
•I
=
=
■>
.=
=
4
I
7
25
6
9
-4.650s
+1.527
-
' c
c
-3*9308
-0.899
-4.178s
-4.799S
-5.379S
-4.561s
-
l/
Only those species which comprised more than one percent of the total diet are included,
g/
As determined b y canopy coverage.
3/
J3 indicates a.significant t-value which may b e either positive or negative.
6
e
“>29 “’
"bearded wheatgrass, and sedges were the main grass and grass-like plants
in the diet.
A positive preference was shown for pale agoseris,
potentilia, and sencio (Senecio sppe ) which together formed
diet.
of the
When positive, negative, a nd neutral preferences a re averaged
for grasses and forbe, they show a pattern similar to. that for elk and
cattle with the exception of a lower positive preference (Fig, 9)»
TABLE VI,
■
SHEEP FOOD HABITS A S IEDIOATED B Y
__________
3,563
BtSTANCES OF PLANT USE A T 18 FEEDING SITES
1966;
Nuiriber
■ In­
stances
of use
Taxa
Summer
July-August
18 Feeding Sites
of
ISO
plots
+O.OIT^/
Agr.opyron sub,secundum
Bromus marginatus
Carex spp,
Festuca idahoensis
Hordeum bracbyantkerum
• Poa spp, ■ •
-Stipa columbiana
TrisetumspicatUm
'Miscellaneous grass.
■
-1.944
-2.772s
-
-1,129 ,
+oil#:
-0^4#
E
Agoseris glauca . '
•A s t e r - spp*
Geranium vlscossissimum
4*V ia T I a
T iW 1S-eF n /a v » a .
■ ■^oteaatiUa 'spp.
Senecio -spp.
Taraxacum spp,
Thaiictrum spp.
Trifolium spp, Miscellaneous forbs,
Total forbs
l/
2/
3/
3*548 .
+0.635 -
Total grass ' .■
■ TTiaT *S 0
•values
.
366.-
145
»
.
174
124
90
482
. 2359
10
4
■
5
6
-
3
14
71
'
5
'1 +2*3288
. +4.048s
I.
3 ■ - + 0.663
'I
+1.310
4
-1.868
+1.350
9
-
Only those .species which comprised more than one percent, of the xtotal diet are included,
As determined b y canopy coverage.
S indicates a significant t -value which may be either positive or negative.
$
■ . FORAGE .UTILIZATION AND VEGETATION CHARACTERISTICS
To. determine the effects of elk and cattle on the elk winter range,
personnel of the U» Se Forest Service erected four one-acre enclosures
adjacent to Wall Creek Game Range in
1962
enclosure, to exclude all grazing animals,
as follows:
(I) 'a total
.
(2 ) a n elk enclosure which
(3 ) a
excluded elk in winter "but permitted cattle to graze in spring#
■cattle enclosure which excluded cattle in spring but allowed elk to
graze in w i n t e r a n d . (I) a n elk-cattle enclosure which permitted all
animals to graze.
To measure forage utilization, I clipped a nd weighed
the vegetation from O .96 square foot circular -plots located within the.
enclosures.
Vegetation samples were air dried for at least two weeks,
before weighing.
In 1 9 0 #
ten plots were clipped in July on each
enclosure after the cattle h a d used the range in spring.
plots were clipped on each enclosure as follows:
u s e d the range in winter#
In
1966,
20
(l) in May after elk
(2) in June before cattle used" the range in
spring and (3) in July after cattle used the range in spring.
The
vegetation samples were converted to pounds per acre (Table V I I ) in an
attempt to determine utilization and to evaluate the impact of grazing
b y cattle a n d elk on the vegetation.
To help compensate for any errors
possibly due to inadequate sampling, all measurements of the total
vegetation on each enclosure were totaled for comparison with similar
figures for each of the other enclosures.
Figures for the total enclosure
elk enclosure, cattle enclosure, a nd elk-cattle enclosure were
5,588,
5,292# and 4,505 pounds per acre respectively.
7#579#
These figures
indicate the greatest impact on areas used jointly b y cattle a nd elk.
TABLE H I .
WEIGHTS PER ACRE FOR VEGETATION ON ELK WINTER RANGE AS DETERMINED B Y MEASUREMENTS
OF .TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY O .96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS IN FOUR ONE-ACRE -EXCLOSURES
_
Agropyron
spieafrum
Festnca
idahoensis
Miscellaneous
grass
Total grass
Total forts
Total
vegetation
l/
.
:
’
"
Elk-Cattle
Total Exclosure_______ Elk Exclosure________Exclosure _
' l/
132/ 237 / 235/ 53^
.170/
62/ 101/ 82 210/ 234/ 94/
420/
860/ 817/ 807
100/
l4l/ 122 /
108
6$o/l238/ll74/l449
l4oo/ 46?/ 474/
727
2050/ 17.05/ 1648/2176
250/ 508/ 875/ 877 230/ 361/
50/
l4l/ 195/
197
50/
97/
_
'■
""
"
Cattle Exclosure
81
50/
475/ 495
92/
44
24/
132/
309
370/ 362/ 587/ 676
180/ 286/ 290/ 239
470/ 7U / 1171/II 56 490/ 692/ 661/ 620 600/ 672/ 1009/1224
'640/ 324/ 552/ 564
680/ 300/
1110/ 1035/ 1723/1720 1170/
469/
593‘ 800/ 262/
502/
223
992/1130/1213 1400/ 934/1511/1447
All figures indicate pounds per acre in the following sequencei after use b y cattle in
spring 1965/after use b y elk in winter .1966/before cattle use in spring 1966/after cattle
use in spring 1966.
_
'
-
33 -
They further suggest a greater impact h y elk than b y cattle«
The
difference in pounds per acre for total vegetation between the elk and
the cattle exclosures is. due primarily to the greater abundance of forbs
on the former»
The difference in pounds per acre between the elk-cattle
exclosure and the elk and the cattle exclosures is due primarily to the
greater abundance of grass on each of the two latter exclosures#
Forage utilization b y elk during the winter amounted to 15 and 33%
on the exclosure used jointly b y cattle and elk and on the exclosure used
only b y elk respectively#
That the overall intensities of use for both
■
exclosures was similar is indicated b y the fact that both contained
approximately the same quantity of vegetation when elk left the winter
range#
Forage utilization b y cattle was masked b y continued plant growth
during the period they were on the spring range#
-/
Data from the total
exclosure indicated a total vegetation increase of
32%. for
this period. ■
If 32% potential vegetation increase is assumed for both the elk and elkcattle exclosures during tljis same period then a total percent utilization
of
3^
and
19%
respectively is indicated#
Basal intercept of plant species was measured along a 100 foot line
transect in each of the four exclosures in May#
This provided an index
/
for plant density and species composition#
Plant density as indicated
b y total basal intercept expressed as a percentage differed between
exclosuresv(Table V I I I )#
exclosure#
The percentage value was greatest for the total
Values for the others is order from highest to lowest were
TABLE V I I I 6 ■ VEGETATION COMPOSITION OF ELK WINTER A ND SUMMER RANGE AS DETERMINED B Y
BASAL INTERCEPT ALONG I s000 FEET OF LINE TRANSECT.
Taxa
Winter
One Acre Exclosures
EUk™
CatElk
Exel,
Cattle
tie
Excl,
Excl.
100
100
100
ft,of
ft,of
Tranft, of
TranTransect
sect
sect
Total
Exel,
100
'fteOf
-
Festuea IdaNoensis
Koeleria cristata
Poa Spp0
S t i p a .c o l u m b i a m .
Stipa c®mata
Miscellaneous grass
Antennaria spp»
Phlox spp 6
Miscellaneous forks
Total vegetation
l/
0.8
%
o
.
Tramsect
Summer
Three
Seven
Tcro
Game-., ■• Forest ■ Forest
Range
' Land
Land
E x e l 0Excl,
ExgilLY
150
100 ■
35.0
• ft.of
ft,of
ft. of
TranTraaTransect
sect
sect
8.3
=
7,3
0,1
#6
5 * -..-. ■
3,3
_
‘« ■
”-
0,1 .
0,1
Ith
I h t rJ
0.3
7.1
0,3
3.0
-
0,3
.
6.3
0.2 , 1.2
.1.7
-
2.7"
4.4
3.3
.
0.3
0.5
3.2
....
T
1.4
o.l
:1.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.2
«
0.1
0,1
0.1
1.0
0.7
0.4
12,6
11,7-
10,8
Percent of total transect intercepted b y each species.
0.3
2.7
.
0.7
2.4
=»
0.9
2.0
0,1
0.2
0.3
1.0
l.l
5,3
16,1
6,7
11,6
-
8
»
elk
exclOBure,
35 -
elk-cattle exelosure and cattle exclosure„
difference in plant densities was
attributable
Most of the
to Idaho fescue and
bluegrasseso' Decreases in values for these grasses was accompanied b y
an increase in values
columbiana),
for
Juaegrassj, Columbia aeedlegrass (Stipa
pussytoes, and phlox (Phlox s p p . ).
These data indicate a lower value for plant density on the exclosure
grazed b y elk alone than for either the exclosure grazed b y cattle alone
,
■
or the
'
exclosure
"
grazed b y cattle and elk combined.
r
I do not believe that
the indicated differences in plant densities are due to grazing alotie„
Other ecological factors possibly masked the influence of grazing.
The
four exclosures are located on.a low crested ridge with a slope of four
to six percent.
the cattle
The total exclosure is located towards the bottom and
exclosure
is located towards' the top of this ridge.
between exelosures is about 30 yards.
Distance
The lower portion of the slope
1
.
;
originates in a" dominant fescue-wheatgr&ss type and the upper portion
.terminates in a dominant sagebrush-fescue type.
•■ '
occupied b y an ecotone between the two, .
I .established fifteen
■
6x 6
•
The intermediate area is
' . ' ' "
' •
foot exclosures b y the placement of
■ .
'
'
,agronomy cages on the forest and game range as follows s
game range three, .
Forest Service winter range seven, and'summer range five.. Methods for
determining percent utilization were the same as for the larger exelosures.
Clippings
on
the cattle spring (elk winter), and summer range, (cattle and
elk), were made as f o l l o w s ;
(!) in May after use b y elk in winter, (2) in
June before use b y cattle in spring', (3) in July after use b y cattle in
•"36spring j, (b ) in July after use
by
elk in summer, (5) in July before use b y ­
cattle in summer and (6 ) in October after use b y cattle in summer.
Measurements for each individual exclosure are given in Tables Xiy3, X V 9
a n d XVi in the Appendix.
Combined data for the game range exclosures (Table IX), indicated
usage values of 2h and
winter.
8$, for
grass a nd forbs respectively b y elk in
Total vegetation utilization was 21$.
Idaho-fescue were heavily used.
.
The high indicated utilization of blue‘
1
Bluebunch wheatgrass and
.
,
1
•
’•
bunch wheatgrass is probably fairly representative of its use on other
areas.
However, its relatively high density here (Table VI-H'), allows
more accurate measurement bn these three exclosures than on others.
The seven'exelosures on the forest winter range were on south, west,
a n d southwest f a c i n g 'slopes a n d ,ridgetops which usually remain free of
'
‘
1'
snow during winter and,receive heavy u s e
.•
■
1
by
elk.
Elk utilised grass and
•
/
forbs 33 and 3^$ respectively with the heaviest use on Idaho fescue, 48$.
Total utilization was 33$.
spring.
Cattle frequently use these same areas during
Utilization of. grass and forbs was 15 and 57$ respectively.
Idaho fescue was the .most heavily'used grass with 48$ utilization..
Total
utilization was 34$.
Three of the five exelosures on summer range were1in areas expected
to receive heavy elk a n d cattle
use.
Elk utilization totaled 18$ with 21
a n d 15$ on grass and forbs respectively (Table X).
Elk utilization was
probably masked somewhat b y rapid early growth on the summer rangq.
utilization totaled 48$ with
58
Cattle
and 33$ on grass and forbs respectively.
•
TABItE IX.
FORAGE UTILIZATION
TWO HUNDRED THIRTY
Taxa
Agropyron spieatum
Festuca idahoensis
Koeleria oristata
Poa spp.
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass
Total fo r b s Total vegetation
BY ELK. AHD CATTLE A S INDICATED B I WEIGHTS
0.96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS l/ ON THE
Winter Game Range
3 Enclosures
After Elk Use
In=
Out=
Io
util=
side
side
izh.=
15
15'
plots tion
plots
I 87 '
-251
297^
36$
3%
37
59
7
.=
,
Winter Range Forest Land
7 Exclosures
After Elk Use
After
Before
InIn=
Cattle
Out=
*
side
side
side
util=
use
iza=
70
30
35
'35
plots plots
tion
plots
plots
38
37
31
201
.
19
34
65
8
39
=
73
23
=
799
206
605
189
2k
1005
19k.
21
'8 .
OF VEGETATION FROM
FESCUE=WHEATGRASS ZONE.
- 11
381 .
173
55^
39
104
'15
31
59
48
21
21
114
19
27
33
34
370
33 .
8
256
l/
One=Ealf of the plots were within 6x 6 foot exclosures.
e
x
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
,
2/
All figures except 0
Jo utilization represent pounds per
;
Cattle
Out=
side
30
plots
Use
37
125
15
17
36
155
68
69
"" 3
265
39
.87
34
196
299
232
253
100
13
15
57
461
531
353
34-
-
51
81
48
=
=
<=.
=
The others were outside the
acre. •
•
$
util=
ization
1
i
TABLE X. •FOBAGE UTILIZATION B Y ELK AND CATTLE A S INDICATED BY WEIGHTS OF VEGETATION FROM
ONE H U N D R E D .FORTY-SEVEN, Q .$6 SQUARE F O O T .CIRCULAR PLOTS l/ ON TBE SPRUCE-FIR ZONE.
Summer Range
5 Enclosures
.-,After Elk Use
Before
; .:
Cattle
Out£ 1side
utilside
use
20
iza. 20
25
'' •
plots tion
plots
"plots
Grass
Forhs
•Total
.12832/
809
2092
IOlk
21
691
15
1705
18
6x 6
109k
After'
Inside
kl
Riots
Cattle
Outside
kl '
plots
Use
utilization
*
■
1252
523
58
591 ■
791
531
20k3
105k
. 33
k8
1691
l/
One-half of the plots were within
foot exclosures.
The. others, were outside the plots.
2/
All figures except % utilization represent pounds per acre*
»39“
■
.
I
Fifty foot lines transects were installed and the basal intercept of
vegetation measured in conjunction with
'
(Table V I I I )o
12
of the '6x6 foot exclosures
These data' indicate t h e highest total vegetation index on
the game range exclosures»
The seven exclosures on key forest land
winter range areas s h o w ’' the lowest index of total vegetation density.
Individual transect measurements are recorded in Table XVII Appendix.
EAlGE EELATiOlSHIPS
Four criteria were presented b y Oele (1958)• and reviewed b y Stevens
(1965) for determining competition between b ig game an d livestock*
These
criteria ares (l) that game and livestock use the same range areas, (2 ) '
that game
plants
are
and
livestock use the same forage plants, (3 ) that the forage
an
important source of forage for either game or livestock,
a n d (4) that the forage plants are in limited supply or deteriorating in
production as a result of combined use*
attempt to evaluate
elk and sheep*
competition
I used these criteria in an
between elk an d cattle as well as between
A-meaningful interpretation of.the. last criterion was
difficult because no data on range trends were available for periods
previous to m y study*
Elk=Cattle
' N
U* S. Forest Service grazing records showed approximately
on.the Wall Greek spring a n d summer ranges in 1937«
increased to approximately 750 b y .1942*
650
cattle
The number, of cattle
These early records showed cattle
grazing on the spring range for the entire months of June a nd October.
Grazing on the summer range occurred during July, August, and September,®
F r o m i 960 on, cattle grazing was restricted to the spring range from
approximately
July to
mid-June
mid-October*
1960-61,
to mid=July»
With the purchase
the Fish a n d Game .Department
rights for
311
The summer range was grazed from mid-
of
the Wall Creek Game Eange in
acquired
and retired the grazing
head ®f .cattle which h a d formerly grazed on both the forest
spring and summer
ranges.
Since i 960, cattle animal unit months have been
reduced from approximately 1,400 to 500 on the Wall Creek spring range.
=Ui = '
numbers' of elk on the. Wall Creek Unit h a v e .increased.from the mid-
1930's
as was previously noted.
Data in Tables IV and V indicated
only
three plant species of
significance, in either, diet were used is common b y both elk' a nd cattle'
'
on the elk winter range.
a n d bluegrass,'
(Table
IX),
These were bluebuneh wheatgrass, Idaho fescue
Data from the seven exclosures ©n key.elk winter range
indicated hea'vy utilization only on
both elk a nd cattle,
Idaho fescue;
48^ b y
.This probably does not represent excessive use
because of the difference in time of use b y elk and cattle,
■Data from Tables IV a n d V do not suggest competition between cattle
a n d elk on the summer range.
For
each
grass species 'for which cattle
displayed a positive preference, elk displayed a negative
p r e ference,. Ihe same holds true for
mainly of
forbs,
forbs,
the cattle diet consisted
appear that the food
habits
of each animal
or
neutral
Whereas the elk diet consisted
mainly of
grass.
complimented
It would
that of the other
on the summer range, ■
. Elk-Sheep
A n early history of overgrazing b y sheep along a sheep driveway in
the Gravellies is indicated b y the following
Service report (1926),
quotation
"1
from a Forest
"Continuous overgrazing for years has been so
severe as to kill even the
sagebrush.
By July 12, 1932
only
12 days
after sheep h a d b e e n admitted to the. National Forest, this land had been •
stripped of practically all u s a b l e ■vegetation,
land on whielj
no control
of
grazing
Ihis
is in effect,"
is public
domain'
>
U , ,S, Forest Servied
sheep grazing records from
1932
to the present indicate a steady reduction
in the numbers of sheep, a n d time spent "by sheep on the summer range.
This is represented b y a reduction of 30 to 6
in the. animal unit months
on different allotments.
During ray study elk were not observed to use areas in conjunction
w i t h sheep.
Since elk were found in areas directly adjacent to sheep
allotments, and were observed on the Standard Creek Allotment before sheep
arrived, it is possible that elk and sheep are. not compatible.
Similar
observations were noted b y Stevens (1965),
When considering the percent of the diet and the percent of the
community constituted b y each plant species, the summer food habits of
elk a n d sheep (Tables I V and- V J ) followed almost identical trends for
grasses.
Pale agoseris was.the only forb for which a mutual positive
preferences was indicated.
elk formed
67%
36
and
39%
-The five forbs used, in common b y sheep and
of their diets respectively.- Fprbs formed
72
and
of the sheep a n d elk diets respectively. .This indicated a possibility
for competition for forbs.
APPBiroiX
-44-
Figure 10.
Grid Map of study area for use with Table XVII in showing
locations of elk observations. Locations of line transects
and exclosures are also shown.
TABLE XI,
PERCENTAGES OF 1,170 INDIVIDUAL E LK OBSERVA­
TIONS ON WINTER RANGE, APRIL-MAY 1966,
LISTED B Y £ SQUARE MILE.
Percent
Location of Elk
Percent
.Percent
Location of Elk ■ Location of Elk
8
-Pr
XJl
:
'
ElfE5
Fl
F^
0,8
1 .2 ''
G4
.
. 13 .8
16
2 ,9
.
H7
1.0 .
19.5 .
18
19
: "9 A
10,9
5.8
8.7
l/ See Figure 10 for locations
111
;
.
J7
J8
J9 ■
Jll
0.7
7,0...
10,0
4.1
4.1 :
8
TABLE XII.
FOOD HABITS OF ELK A S IHDIGATED BY 3,830 IHSTAHCES OF
PLAHT USE A T 18 FEEDIHO SITES 1965.
--------- -.......................—
—'
.........................—----------------
■
_
■
- ■■
■
■
-------------------------------------- ■
Summer
June-August
18 Feeding Sites
Taxa
Humber
$ of
InDiet
stances
of u s e ______ ■
,
■
Carex spp.
7
•"
Festuca idahoensis '■
. Poa spp. '
./
Miscellaneous grass :
. .
Total grass,.;
-
' 138
4l"
213
-235
. 625;
:
% of t -value,
Com180
muxplots
ity _
^
^
I
5
12
'5
10
6
14
-. ■
- 0.738^/
-3.4258
+ 0.585
-2.7358
-
Achillea m i l l e f o l i u m 108
.
3
.9
-4.1438,
Agoseris glauca
■■■
296
8
2
+2.664s
■Aster spp^ /
:
217
■ ■ 5' ■ 3
+ 0 .898;'
' ' Eflgeron spp;
106 ,
3 - 2
+0.309 ■
Geranium Viscossisslmum ■;
154
4
2
.+ # % 8
Geum triflorum
.
149
4
2 . +1.406
Potentilla s p p . ■
'.
.155 ■
4
5
- 0.651-'
Taraxacum spp..
IO 65
25
21
+2.5308
■ Trifolium spp; .
.
102
2
9
-3.9938
Viola nuttallii,
116
3
I
+ 2.632
Miscellaneous forhs r.
477
14
22
-2.5228
Total forbs'
2945
—
l/
2/
3/
—
— —
—
75
'
:
I
Only those species which comprised more than one percent
of the total diet, are included.
As determined "by canopy coverage.
S indicates a significant t'-value which may he either
positive .or negative.
o\
8
TABLE XIII.
:
FOGB HABITS OF CATTLE AS INDICATED. B Y 5 >3^9 INSTANCES GF PLANT USE AT 24
FEEDING. SITES I 965.
10
Taxa
Agropyron spicatum
Agrbpyroh subsecundum
Brahus spp.
Carex spp. '
Danthonia unispieata
Festuda idahoensis
Festuca seabrella
Koeleria cristata
Poa spp.
.Stipa Columbians
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass'
Achillea millefolium
Agoseris glauca
.Arnica sororia
Taraxacum spp.
Trifolium spp.
Miscellaneous forbs
Total forbs
I/
g/
3/
Number
m-,
stances
’ of use
383
■_
56
.. . 59 .
.„'f433e
--
.87
$ of
Diet
3
2
20
4
13
-
412
72
1760
"
30
■ 58
81
t -value
$ Of
Com­
mun­
ity
200
plots
:4 #/ .. +1.913 ^
0
+1.044
2 ,
4
+1.338
-0.407
23
+1.484
2
+2.719S
5
-+2.737S
.4
I
+2.489
-
-
Tm
-
2
2
2
-5.250
+0.487
+ 1.238
-1 .708.
Number
In­
stances
of use
72
291
12
I
I
-
.
-
$ of
Diet
0
463
1
**
-
78
’■
.. '
-
380
167
230
2111
’
.
f of-
t -value■
Com­
mun­
ity
■ plots
.280
-
-
e,
15
5
I
+2.515S
+ 1.268
+3.0873
2
37
455
«
3
3
4
131
.
IT
4
'
Summer
July-August
14 Feeding Sites
. Spring
June-July
Feeding Sites
17
-
11
10
3
12
2
-
~
13
8
6
-
3
-
9
5
-1.103
+1.358
=
+2.4253
+1.752
+ 1.680
75
-
-
5
I
=
-
32
I
60
2
=•
-
-
-
-2.044
+l.4o6
«=.
-
231
9
108
4
19
9
-2.972S
-2.275
138
5
20
“6.569s
569
21
-
Only those species which comprised more than one percent of the total diet are included,
As determined b y canopy coverage.
S indicates a significant t -value which may be either positive or negative.
Jn
e
TABLE XIV.
FORAGE UTILIZATION B Y ELK AS INDICATED B Y WEIGHTS OF VEGETATION FROM THIRTY
0.96' SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS l/ ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZONE 1966.
Winter Game Range After Elk Use
Exclosure I
•
Tasm
1
•..•
■
'
Inside
5
/
Agropyron spicatum
F e S t u e a -idahoensis
Koeleria cristata
Poa spp.
Stipa comat a
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass
Total forhs
Total vegetation
■
Exclosure
..Inside
./Out- .-to#
utilside
iza5
plots tion
118^/ 58
488 352
42
34
42 .52
54
56
34
If.
762 :584
136 254
898 838
5
/Outside
5
plots' ■plots
372
51/ . .424
28 ,
44
86
19 •
0
58 ■ 42
4 .
: 106 ' 122
4
10
632
23 . . 63G
- .
- 190 : 202
826" : 834
.7. .
2
Exelosure
utilization
12
-
■
6x 6
foot exclosures.
In- ./Outside
side
28
-
'I
.-
l/
One-half -of the plots were within
exclosures.
2/
All figures except % utilization represent pounds per acre.
5
plots
'
348 ■
608.
16
10
14
3
-
util. izaplots tion
'5
130
402
14
8
18
O 26
996 ' 598
292
HO
1288
708
63
34
12
20
22
=T
4o '
62
45 .
The others were outside the
TABLE X V 0
FOBAaE UTILIZATION B Y ELK A S INDICATED B Y WEIGHTS OF VEGETATION FROM SEVENTY
0.96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS l/ ON THE FESCUE-WEEATGRASS ZONE I966,
Winter Range Forest Land After Elk
Taxa
.Exclosure 4
In- Out1P
side side util=
5
5
ization
teS/
154
42
38
32
Total -vegetation
492
142
146
66
=»
58
10
.280
320
=>
50
8
30
'6
236
82
.600 318
28
78
130
244 144
4l
6
24
6 - O
26
6
77
48 . 108
46
57
4o
16
514 200
61
74
72 . 86
'47 ■586 286
51
«
.
.
188
16
46
100
-
350
276
626
• vfo
l
8
130
31 ■
20
~
54
130
=»
6
348 ■ I '
146
47
21 .
■■
308
184
»
26 , 38
92 - 4o
20
52
66
44
4
18"
252
29
130
382
22
Exclosure 6
Exclosure T
In- Out- '
In- Out-?
$
side 'side utilside side util5
5.
iza5
5
ization plots plots tion
Jir -
Agropyron spieatum
Festuea idahoensis
Koeleria cfistata
Poa spp0
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass
Total fofbs
Exelosure 5
In'- Out%
side- side util=
5
5 ization
TABLE XV.
(Continued)
Taxa
. Winter Range Forest Land After Elk
Exclosure 8
Exelosure.9_______ Exclosure 10
InIn— OutIn- OutOutIo ■
side
side side utilside utilside side utilizaizaiza• 5
'5
5
5
5
5
tion plots plots tion
plots plots tion plots plots
i
6b'
44
Agropyron spicatum
Festuca idahoensis
34
96
—
Koeleria cristata
kb ■ . 38
Poa spp.
158
i4o
Stipa eomata •
. 4o
Miscellaneous grass 38
Total grass ■
338 ■ 358
Total forbs
.172 . 1 1 2
Total vegetation
510.
470
31
—
-
' 35
18'
8
198
-
-
14
11
-
476
100
'
—
-
38
-
26
28
62
20
14
100
12
8
-
54
22
-
58
-
•*»
602
244
59
,HO
■ ISO
712
374
168
4
-
-
156
-
274
80
47
354
266
HO
50
4o
B
vn
O
S
-
-60
■
59
-
43
■
-
25
l/
One-half of the plots, were within 6x 6 foot exclosures. The others were
outside the exclosures. All plots were c l i p p e d .in May.,
2/
All figures, except $ utilization represent pounds per acre.
I
TABLE XVI.
. .. _
FORAGE UTILIZATION BY CATTLE AS' INDICATED BY WEIGHTS OF VEGETATION FROM SIXTY
O.96 SQUARE FOOT CIRCULAR PLOTS l/ ON THE FESCUE-WHEATGRASS ZONE 1966.
Spring Range Forest Land After Cattle
Exclosure 5
Exelosure .6
Exclosure 7
Taxa
Agropyron spicatum
Festuca-idahoensis
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass
Total forbs.
Total vegetation
Inside
Outside util5
-5'. iza- .
plots plots tion
■
126
122^
16 . O
. l6
k6
50
>
1%
192
86
.
180
54
24
278
364
Inside
Out- - sc
side utiliza5
- 5
plots plots tion
40
66
/2
6
170
126 .
46
82 . •6
6
O
262
280
174 ■ 54
69
436
334
23
In.side
Outside
sc
utiliza5
5
plots plots tion
14
182
74,
58
22
62
60
44 ■
328
■ 98
• 188
- 170
426
358
■
66
19
24
43
-
16 '
TABLE XVI.
(Continued)
Spring Range Forest Land After Cattle
Exclosure 9
Exclosure 10
In=
OutInOutOutIn' Jo,
i
side util- side side util
side side util- side
iza.iza-.
1.28.■
'5
5
5
5
5
5
tion
.
plots
plots plots
plots.
■ tion'
plots plots tibn
•Exclbsure ■8-.
Taxa
•
Agropyron spicatum
Festuca idahbensis
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous grass
Total grass ■ .
.Total forhs
Total vegetation
.26
18 .
26
25k '
3h2
ko
k l6
.
-
8
66
36^
332
696
.
112
528
O:
:
39
■»
66''
384
36
432
482 ■
2k
914
'56
-
...
66
218
O*'
43
44
'—
328
24
92
81
420
54
l/
One-half of the plots were within 6x 6 foot exclosures.
.exclosures. All plots were clipped in July.
-
2/
All figures except $ utilization represent pounds per acre.
174
.24
24
-
222
128
.
350
74
20
20
114
88
202
The others were outside the
57
17
17
49
31
42
TABLE X V T I .
VEGETATION COMPOSITION OF ELK WINTER AND SUMMER ..RANGE A S DETERMINED B Y
MEASUREMENTS. OF BASAL INTERCEPT ALONG 6$0 FEET OF LINE TRANSECT.
Game Range
. Winter-
Taxa
V
spieatum
.Danthonia
' unispicata
Festuca '■
;idahoensis
KdeTeria
„ cristata
Poa spp.
Stipa comata
Miscellaneous
- grass
Total grass
Total forb s,
Total
.Vegetation
l/
.2/
Forest Land
Winter
Tranr- Tran- Transect sect .sect
# 3
# 2
#1
50 . 50 ‘ 50
feet feet feet
0.1^
Forest Land
Summer
Tfan- 'Tran- Tran- 'Transect sect sect sect
# 10 # 11 # 1 6 # 17
50
50
50
, 50,
feet feet feet feet
Tran- Tran- Transect sect sect
#4
# 6
#5
50
50 . 50
feet feet feet
Tran- Tran- Transect
sect sect
# 8
# 7
# 9
50
^ 50
50
feet
feet feet
0.5
0.1
0.1
—
»
O
7.3
0.8
0.7
0.4
•
L
•■
»
0.3
—
0 . 2 ^ ^ 0.1
0.6
0.7
■
I
V?
7.4
o.i
0.8
0.5
0.1
9.2
0.4
5.9
.2.5
0.1
2.5
0.4
0.7
1.7
'0.2
1.4
1.3
0.4
0.1
1.4
0.1
0.1
T.5
0.1
26.4
,0.1
0.1
0.1
1.1
2.7
.2.0
4.5
0.8
5.0
1.4
6 .9
1.7
0.1
6.2
1.5
28.1 10.7
7.7
4.7
5,3
6.4
■
9.1
8.1.
1.8
9.6
0.3
6.7
4.1
9.1
0.4 • 0.8
0.6
0.6
2.0 : 3.4
0.1
0.1
1 .6
0.5
0.5
2.5
0.1
Ool
-
-
-
•
0.1
13.2
3.7
5.9
6.1
0.3
17.0
1.0
0.1
5.0
1.9
0.3
8.7
1.3
6.9
10.0
6.9
14.3
.
•
1.1
2.1
13.6
1.5
1.9
_
-
0.1
2.3
'1.5
■'
9.6
Percent of total transect intercepted by.each.species.
Transect N o . .11 was not included in'the'text.
'V
12.0- 18.5
-
LITERATURE CITED
Bm o t h , Wo Eo 1950o .Flora of M o n t a m j, Part I j, Cozjifers a n d Monoeots»
Research Foundation at Montana "State College, Bdgentens ,Montana. 232 p$ .
'-.'and J 0 Co Wright,
1959« Flora, of Montanas Part I I s
' Dicotyledons» Montana State Colleges Bozemans Montana.
280 pp.
C a n f i e M s R. H 0 ‘ 19^1« Application of the line interception method in
sampling Tange vegetation. J o u r . -Forestrys 39s 388-394.
,
Coles .Go F e 1958«
Big game-livestock competition on M o n t a n a ’s mountain
rangelands. Mont. .Wildl0 Aprils 24-30»
Daufoenmires R. F. 1943»
Vegetational z o n a t i o n ■in the Rocky Mountains.
Botanical Review 9 ( 6 ) s 325=393»
,
*
. 1959*' A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis0
Northwest Science 33(l): 43-64.
Kirschs J 0 B 0 1962. Range u s e s relationships to Ioggings and food habits
of the elk la the' Little Belt Mduntainss Montana 0 .Unpufol. thesis
(M 0S 0)s.Montana State Colleges Bozeman0. 44-pp*
. .19660 Personal C o m n m i e a t i o n s .Game Biologists Montdsaa Fish
and G a m e s Bozeman.
•Khowltons F 0 F* 1960» Food habitss movements and population structure
of moose in the Gravelly Mountains s Montana*
J 0- W i l d l 0 M g m t 0
24(2)r 162-170.
L i s J e r m e G0 R* 1965» Statistical Inference I, 1st ed.
Brotherss Ine0s Ann A r b o r s Michigan*
658 pp.
'
Edwards.
,
'
Jfeekies B* J 0 1965« D e e r s elk and cattle food habits and. range relation­
ships in the Missouri River Breaks.
Unpubl. thesis (Ph.D.) Montana '
State Colleges Bozeman.
229 P P «
Martin, A 0 C es R* H 0 Gensch and C, P 6 Brown.
1946» Alternative methods
in upland game b i r d food analysis.
J0 Wildl. Mgmt0 10(1): 8-12.
Pictons H 0 D*
Montana*
i 960. Migration patterns of the Sun River elk herd,
J. W i l d l 0 M g m t 0 2 4 ( 3 ) S 279=29©.
Rouse, R* A 0 1957»
Elk food habits, range use and movements, Gravelly
Mountains, Montana.
Unpubl. thesis (M.So), Montana State College,
■ Bozeman0 . 29 pp*
.
'\
=55“
,
x
'
■
Stevensj, D 0 R 0 I g S ^ 0 Crow Creek elk, sheep and cattle summer range
relationships Study0 Unp ubl0 thesis (M 0S 0 ), Montana State College,
Bozeman0 68 p p 0
'
USDA, Forest Service,
1926,
Title 2220 « Grazing Management Plan,
Madison District,-Beaverhead Rational Forest, Montana, Unpubl0
Typewritten,
•
'
______________
o 19^3-UU 0 . Range Management Plan,
Madison District,
Beaverhead Rational Forest, Montana, Unpubl0 Typewritten,
o
grazing records
2
1932=66,
Title 2210 - Cattle, horse and sheep
Standard Creek, Rail Creek, Unpubl, Typewritten,
_....,,,r-BCTTV I TBRARIES
1762 10013648 8
DATE DUE
DEMCO. INC. 38-2931
N
m
£*79
/
\
C
c
p ,
Z